Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 76

Thread: Is there any point to fiction?

  1. #31
    Voice of Chaos & Anarchy
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    In one of the branches of the multiverse, but I don't know which one.
    Posts
    8,716
    Blog Entries
    556
    Quote Originally Posted by tylerdf View Post
    Is there any point to anything?
    Maybe

  2. #32
    Registered User kelby_lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,620
    The point to reading fiction is to read what other people think. Yes, that novel may be their one opinion, but then you read another one...Let's face it, in life you're not going to come across many people who wish to discuss the meaning of life/deep philosophical questions with you.

  3. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by MANICHAEAN View Post
    "Fiction is to the grown man what play is to the child; it is there that he changes the atmosphere and tenor of his life." Robert Louis Stevenson.

    "Literature is a luxury. Fiction is a necessity." G.K.Chesterton.

    "Fiction, at the point of development at which it has arrived, demands from the writer a spirit of scrupulous abnegation. The only legitimate basis of creative work lies in the courageous recognition of all the irreconcilable antagonisms that make our life so enigmatic, so burdensome, so fascinating, so dangerous - so full of hope. They exist! And this is the only fundamental truth of fiction." Joseph Conrad.
    1. I'd dispute that. The key is the word "grown" - as though growth had come to an end. There is no such thing as a "grown man", only a "growing man." "Grown" is stagnation and death. I like the analogy though - yes, children play with toys, and adolescents play with sex and intoxicants, and post-adolescents play with other things, like their minds, and maybe fiction. But what's beyond that? That's my point and question. Or do you imagine growth and the possibilities of life at some point stop?

    2. That's interesting. Maybe it's right. By "literature" I imagine he means all that poncy, pretentious, overly-poetic stuff. But why is "fiction a necessity"? Can you answer me that?

    3. Dig. Isn't that what I'm doing here?

    Quote Originally Posted by miyako73 View Post
    Where else can you create heavens and gods and destroy demons and hells but in fiction? Are such creations and destructions important? I like to think so. Whatever empowers can be a good thing for the mind.
    Can you explain that further? What is the benefit of creating demons and hells? How do they empower? How does it bring benefit to you?

    JAMCRACKERS: That was interesting; I like your take on things. I'm not sure it was really about "reading literary fiction" - but maybe that's my fault for not phrasing the initial question in a more specific way. Anyways, thanks for the thoughts.

    Quote Originally Posted by tylerdf View Post
    Is there any point to anything?
    "Life has no meaning save the one you give it" is a quote I like.

    Quote Originally Posted by kelby_lake View Post
    The point to reading fiction is to read what other people think.
    I don't think that's true. A novel doesn't necessarily contain what people think: to know what people think you'd have to read their non-fiction, wouldn't you, or talk to them? Think of a fictional writer you've read loads, and now tell me what they think, based on their work. I can't think of how that would work, except in generalised sweeping statements like, "Kurt Vonnegut thought bureaucracy was daft". But do prove me wrong, please.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neely View Post
    Yes I'm waiting for a reply from the thread starter.
    Ditto, sir!

    Anyways, let's try and move this on: I've gone beyond thinking reading fiction is pointless to realising that it's daft to expect too much from it and that that's the pointless bit. I guess I get frustrated 'cos it's such a trumpeted thing whereas I see it mostly as distraction and in many cases the work of people who haven't even begun to figure out the basics about living a happy human life, which is generally all that anybody wants. Sylvia Plath, Virginia Woolf, James Joyce, Ernest Hemingway - I don't give a monkeys that they had a way with words, they were all flops as human beings as far as I'm concerned. Though, having never met them, that may be a little harsh: perhaps they were lovely, kind people in person and the suicidal tendencies and substance abuse could have been...nah, there's no excuse for that: not if you're making yourself out as a purveyor of wisdom. But then are they? And are people even looking at them in that way? I just can't separate the author from their work, and if the author's mind is one that dwelled in hell, I don't really feel much of a need to follow them there, through their words.

    And what are words anyway? Mere utterances and sophisticated grunts that stand in the place of thoughts and feelings, always at least one or two steps beyond the impulse behind them. I guess it's the impulse that interests me. The tree behind the apple - and the ground beneath the tree.

    Sheet: maybe I should make up a story and put all this in the mouths of characters and see if I can't work it out that way. ;-)

    But, c'mon, the distraction hypothesis has gotta be worth looking at - though maybe not here. Who among a literary community wants to stand up and say, yep, I just read to get away from my own inner-being 'cos I don't know what life's really for? Who wants to admit that their intellectualism is just mind games to keep their mind busy from seeing what their mind is really like? I read - sorry, tried to read - a book on critical literary theory the other day - but, I swear, every page I turned to all I could find was gobbledygook dressed up in fancy sentences and the only thing I got from it - from every single of the varied authors and contributors - was, man, these people need to get a life. Imagine that that's what turns you on, tossing over and making up theories about something so abstract as another man's fleeting fictions and dreams. It boggles the braincogs.
    Last edited by rubsley; 04-30-2012 at 03:13 PM.

  4. #34
    Registered User gruntingslime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by rubsley View Post
    Who wants to admit that their intellectualism is just mind games to keep their mind busy from seeing what their mind is really like?
    Because one feels lost and reads does not necessitate distraction, one could very well be looking into a work of fiction the way they would look to advise of someone they admire.

    Fiction can be pointless, as anything can, particularly if one's chosen meaning chooses to negate it... but it can have direct influences, for example the vision of 1984 standing as a warning for the shifting political climate.

    It seems to me that you might be trying to seek out some objective meaning or purpose to existence by which to weigh all elements in the balance.

    Do men of presumed importance sometimes take part in frivolous thoughts and activities? I have not had the privilege to oversee their existence but I would wager that it is so.

    I think it's a valid basis for study and reflection.

  5. #35
    Registered User kelby_lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,620
    Quote Originally Posted by rubsley View Post
    I don't think that's true. A novel doesn't necessarily contain what people think: to know what people think you'd have to read their non-fiction, wouldn't you, or talk to them? Think of a fictional writer you've read loads, and now tell me what they think, based on their work. I can't think of how that would work, except in generalised sweeping statements like, "Kurt Vonnegut thought bureaucracy was daft". But do prove me wrong, please.
    Two examples, although when vocalising people's thoughts, they are always bound to sound trite:

    Fitzgerald: fascinated by wealth and the lifestyle it brings, although he knows that at the heart of it, there lies unhappiness.
    Hemingway: interested in masculinity- what makes a man. Also appears to be interested in androgynous women, so maybe his interest in masculinity is not simply misogyny.

    There are certain themes, characters and subjects that run across writers' works that give us an insight into what mattered to them. A writer writing a story about a racist may not be racist himself but race is a subject that interests him. It's just like in real life- we pick up clues about people based on their actions and what they're interested in.

    The point is that different writers will have different perspectives. If I raised Fitzgerald and Hemingway from the dead, and then I got them to write a story about a man who shoots his brother, they will have different tones. If you wrote that story, you might do it in a different way from them. Life is too complex for there to only be one take on it.

  6. #36
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,890
    Quote Originally Posted by kelby_lake View Post
    Two examples, although when vocalising people's thoughts, they are always bound to sound trite:

    Fitzgerald: fascinated by wealth and the lifestyle it brings, although he knows that at the heart of it, there lies unhappiness.
    Hemingway: interested in masculinity- what makes a man. Also appears to be interested in androgynous women, so maybe his interest in masculinity is not simply misogyny.

    There are certain themes, characters and subjects that run across writers' works that give us an insight into what mattered to them. A writer writing a story about a racist may not be racist himself but race is a subject that interests him. It's just like in real life- we pick up clues about people based on their actions and what they're interested in.

    The point is that different writers will have different perspectives. If I raised Fitzgerald and Hemingway from the dead, and then I got them to write a story about a man who shoots his brother, they will have different tones. If you wrote that story, you might do it in a different way from them. Life is too complex for there to only be one take on it.
    Adequate.

  7. #37
    Registered User kelby_lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,620
    Quote Originally Posted by cafolini View Post
    Adequate.
    Not sure if that is a compliment or insult, although saying that, I was aiming to show that one can infer things about the author from the work. A deeper study would have refined my examples.
    Last edited by kelby_lake; 04-23-2012 at 02:02 PM.

  8. #38
    Skol'er of Thinkery The Comedian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    where the cold wind blows
    Posts
    3,919
    Blog Entries
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by rubsley View Post
    And what are words anyway?
    Symbols.

    Quote Originally Posted by rubsley View Post
    Who among a literary community wants to stand up and say, yep, I just read to get away from my own inner-being 'cos I don't know what life's really for? Who wants to admit that their intellectualism is just mind games to keep their mind busy from seeing what their mind is really like?
    Not me. Because this is not true, not for me anyway. First, I'm not sure what the mind is really like. Second, I'm not sure what my "inner-being" really is.

    I will admit to not knowing what "life's really for". I don't. Work? Family? Pleasure? Strength? Money? Morality? Heaven? Not really sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by rubsley View Post
    I read - sorry, tried to read - a book on critical literary theory the other day - but, I swear, every page I turned to all I could find was gobbledygook dressed up in fancy sentences and the only thing I got from it - from every single of the varied authors and contributors - was, man, these people need to get a life. Imagine that that's what turns you on, tossing over and making up theories about something so abstract as another man's fleeting fictions and dreams. It boggles the braincogs.
    There is a lot of bad, self-important criticism out there. But some of it is really compelling and insightful. Have you read Northrop Frye or Harold Bloom or Sandra Cisneros? Or maybe Camille Paglia -- Paglia writes in plain language, very intelligent, very outspoken and brazen, but I always think that her interpretations are, if nothing else, a useful addition to my understanding of a text, author, or literary period.
    “Oh crap”
    -- Hellboy

  9. #39
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by kelby_lake View Post
    Two examples, although when vocalising people's thoughts, they are always bound to sound trite:

    Fitzgerald: fascinated by wealth and the lifestyle it brings, although he knows that at the heart of it, there lies unhappiness.
    Hemingway: interested in masculinity- what makes a man. Also appears to be interested in androgynous women, so maybe his interest in masculinity is not simply misogyny.
    See, now to me that supports my point: seems like a pretty poor investment for the time it takes to read an author's work to say, "well this dead guy I never met thought wealthy people weren't necessarily happy." Everybody thinks that. Who cares that F. Scott Fitzgerald did? And that it takes hours and hours to discover it. Pf.

  10. #40
    Artist and Bibliophile stlukesguild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The USA... or thereabouts
    Posts
    6,083
    Blog Entries
    78
    Again... the point in reading isn't found in the "meaning"... the "point" lies in the pleasure the experience as whole brings. If you find no pleasure in reading then that's your loss. Look elsewhere. Perhaps you might find pleasure in trolling the internet and posting inane questions guaranteed to inflame others. You could then sit back and laugh at all the time wasted by those earnestly attempting to answer your question.

    In other words... "what is the point of this thread?"
    Beware of the man with just one book. -Ovid
    The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.- Mark Twain
    My Blog: Of Delicious Recoil
    http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/

  11. #41
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,890
    Quote Originally Posted by stlukesguild View Post
    Again... the point in reading isn't found in the "meaning"... the "point" lies in the pleasure the experience as whole brings. If you find no pleasure in reading then that's your loss. Look elsewhere. Perhaps you might find pleasure in trolling the internet and posting inane questions guaranteed to inflame others. You could then sit back and laugh at all the time wasted by those earnestly attempting to answer your question.

    In other words... "what is the point of this thread?"
    That must have some meaning. Ha!

  12. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    University or my little estate
    Posts
    2,386
    Quote Originally Posted by rubsley View Post
    See, now to me that supports my point: seems like a pretty poor investment for the time it takes to read an author's work to say, "well this dead guy I never met thought wealthy people weren't necessarily happy." Everybody thinks that. Who cares that F. Scott Fitzgerald did? And that it takes hours and hours to discover it. Pf.

  13. #43
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,890
    Please, people, please. How much confusion can you take before you give up the con and achieve some fusion. Meaning can only occur in what interests you. Words are meaningless without your cooperation.

  14. #44
    confidentially pleased cacian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    13,930
    well the same can be said about about a book
    should a book be taught for example?
    I consider fiction as denouement of the mind and to teachit is to stick it with an institutional tagging that drags down the idea of writing to a boredom state of analogy without aim.
    A book is an art piece and should left to the individual to make out of it what they wish.
    teaching it is a right spoiler. That is what I think anyway.
    it may never try
    but when it does it sigh
    it is just that
    good
    it fly

  15. #45
    Registered User miyako73's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,667
    The point of fiction is to textually experience things that we have not experienced in real life. You can feel the lust, pain, and guilt of an older man falling for an underage girl in Nabokov's Lolita, or you can be a Lolita in your mind feeling or textually experiencing how it is to be desired and lusted for by an older man. For teen readers, that's enough an experience. They don't have to go on dates with grandpas and retirees.
    Last edited by miyako73; 04-30-2012 at 06:00 PM.
    "You laugh at me because I'm different, I laugh at you because you're all the same."

    --Jonathan Davis

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Why isn't science fiction taken seriously?
    By Red-Headed in forum General Literature
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 10-09-2012, 03:10 PM
  2. Best Historical Fiction
    By Sulla in forum General Literature
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-13-2011, 05:25 AM
  3. Fiction vs. philosophy
    By African_Love in forum Philosophical Literature
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 09-16-2010, 11:49 AM
  4. Dream and point of reference
    By The Good Doctor in forum Through the Looking Glass
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-07-2009, 12:10 PM
  5. Point Blanc by Anthony Horowitz
    By Scheherazade in forum Write a Book Review
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-04-2008, 09:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •