who is the most overrated writer ever?

[DanielBenoit]

Eggers is all style and no substance. He has nothing to SAY. (Except maybe, Worship me, Hipsters!) Which is why I can't stand him.

Okay. . .. .obviously you've never read What is What. Besides, it's a bit unjust to use the style/substance dichotomy with postmodern writers, since style is used to express substance (an inheritance from Joyce).

Just because his work is done in a stylistic way doesn't mean he has nothing to say except "look at me I'm so cool because I write in a self-refferential postmodern way". Besides, what's wrong with excersizes in style? Sections of Heatbreaking Work may be excersizes in style, but they're still meaningful. Any unique percpective is meaningful, even if there is no message or meta-narrative.

[FrankMarcopolos]

Okay. . .. .obviously you've never read What is What. Besides, it's a bit unjust to use the style/substance dichotomy with postmodern writers, since style is used to express substance (an inheritance from Joyce).

I have not read What is What. After AHWOSG, why would I be fooled again? I disagree with your statement above in that story is story, for postmodern, modern, postpostmodern, or any other kind of writers, regardless of what they are inheriting from anyone. Style is fine so long as it is used in conjunction with substance, for my taste.

There's nothing wrong with style exercises, per se. They just don't appeal to me. Some people love eating cotton candy, for example. I do not. David Eggers, to me, is literary cotton candy.

[DanielBenoit]

I disagree with your statement above in that story is story, for postmodern, modern, postpostmodern, or any other kind of writers, regardless of what they are inheriting from anyone.

I don't think you understand. The merits of modernist literature brought about a technique in which content is expressed through style. The simplest example being Joyce's Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man in which the youth of the narrator is expressed through the style of the writing. Story is story, but if all stories were told the same way then the history of literature would be kind of boring now would it?

Anyway, we can agree to disagree. I'm enjoying my cotton candy thank you very much

[FrankMarcopolos]

The merits of modernist literature brought about a technique in which content is expressed through style. The simplest example being Joyce's Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man in which the youth of the narrator is expressed through the style of the writing.

Yeah, I know. That's not my point. To me, style for style's sake alone wastes my time. Your mileage may vary.

[stlukesguild]

I'll not argue the merits of Eggers, not having read him... but I will question the dichotomy of style vs substance. What exactly do you imagine makes a worthy substance or subject vs one that is unworthy? A vast portion of the arts are dedicated to the expression of something as seemingly frivolous as sexual infatuation, attraction, lust, and love. Is a work of art automatically relegated to the "frivolous" pile because the theme the artist has chosen isn't something truly "heavy" like the Holocaust, race, gender issues, etc... ?

[FrankMarcopolos]

For me, there has to be SOME point to a story, some reason why the writer is demanding my time to listen to his tale. What that is is less important than that it be there. AHWOSG, for example, is pointless sophistry, written in a whimsical and amusing style. (Again, in my opinion. Another reader could say the point of it IS the whimsical amusement of it, which makes them feel happy...to each their own.)

The style should help to get the reader emotionally invested in a story, thereby allowing for some kind of impact at the end of it.

[DanielBenoit]

For me, there has to be SOME point to a story, some reason why the writer is demanding my time to listen to his tale. What that is is less important than that it be there. AHWOSG, for example, is pointless sophistry, written in a whimsical and amusing style. (Again, in my opinion. Another reader could say the point of it IS the whimsical amusement of it, which makes them feel happy...to each their own.)

The style should help to get the reader emotionally invested in a story, thereby allowing for some kind of impact at the end of it.

For me, sometimes "points" seem to distract books from the rhythms of life. That's what I love about Ulysses; it is first and foremost concerned with the sensations of perception, not any kind of moral or universal truth.

In the immortal words of Mark Twain: "Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot."

In the world of cinema Hungarian director Bela Tarr has revolutionized the language of film by doing away with narrative and focusing on the passing of time and emotion through slow and contemplative camera shots. "I despise stories, as they mislead people into believing that something has happened. In fact, nothing really happens as we flee from one condition to another ... All that remains is time. This is probably the only thing that's still genuine -- time itself; the years, days, hours, minutes and seconds."

[stlukesguild]

Still it leaves the question of whether this or that "point" being made is more important than another... and whether having something serious to communicate inherently makes the work better... or the lack thereof makes it worse. Looking at other artistic forms by way of analogy I again ask what is the "point" of Mozart's Clarinet Quintet or Monet's Waterlilies?

[DanielBenoit]

Looking at other artistic forms by way of analogy I again ask what is the "point" of Mozart's Clarinet Quintet or Monet's Waterlilies?

Exactly, that's why Marxist, feminist, psychoanalytic, etc. forms of criticism can only go so far. Come to think of it, music hardly has any "point". With the exception of opera (whose music exists to express the stroy) really what other types of music really offer a "point"? That's why I side with aestheticism, "art for arts sake". Can one not find Rembrant's Night Watch or DaVinci's The Last Supper beautiful even if we may not know what is going on?

[escapologist]

For me, there has to be SOME point to a story, some reason why the writer is demanding my time to listen to his tale. What that is is less important than that it be there. AHWOSG, for example, is pointless sophistry, written in a whimsical and amusing style. (Again, in my opinion. Another reader could say the point of it IS the whimsical amusement of it, which makes them feel happy...to each their own.)

The style should help to get the reader emotionally invested in a story, thereby allowing for some kind of impact at the end of it.

I think you might be defining 'point' too narrowly. A point of a work of art is whatever the artist wants it to be. If they want it to be just an exercise in style, then that is the point and the validity of that point is not up for discussion. And if anyone were to limit the scope of its meaning, they would be limiting the freedom of art.

[FrankMarcopolos]

For me, sometimes "points" seem to distract books from the rhythms of life. That's what I love about Ulysses; it is first and foremost concerned with the sensations of perception, not any kind of moral or universal truth.

In the immortal words of Mark Twain: "Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot."

In the world of cinema Hungarian director Bela Tarr has revolutionized the language of film by doing away with narrative and focusing on the passing of time and emotion through slow and contemplative camera shots. "I despise stories, as they mislead people into believing that something has happened. In fact, nothing really happens as we flee from one condition to another ... All that remains is time. This is probably the only thing that's still genuine -- time itself; the years, days, hours, minutes and seconds."

I believe the Twain quote was made in jest. As for the rest of your point, I can see what you're talking about, however, that kind of art, whether it be in print or on film, does not appeal to me. I don't want an art form to mirror life precisely, I want it to entertain and then educate or enlighten me, or at least try to.

As far as Ulysses, I'm not an expert on him, so I'll refrain from comment.

I think you might be defining 'point' too narrowly. A point of a work of art is whatever the artist wants it to be. If they want it to be just an exercise in style, then that is the point and the validity of that point is not up for discussion. And if anyone were to limit the scope of its meaning, they would be limiting the freedom of art.

Indeed. However, it does not mean I must enjoy it. I'm talking about my own perspective as an audience member, not as an artist. Obviously, an artist is free to choose to express him/herself any way they want. But don't expect me to pay attention to it if it's only a style exercise... my time is valuable.

As to the points about music above, I would say any song with lyrics has a story, and perhaps someone with more musical acumen than myself might argue that any musical composition tells a story in its own way. And to my ear, my favorite musical artists are the best storytellers -- with the flavoring of the musical style added to make it more (ear)-appealing.

As to visual art, I'm not an expert on that, so I haven't thought much about it. To my mind, though, it seems that even in that art form, the artist can capture a story on the canvas, albeit perhaps more open to interpretation by the viewer since it is static and visual.

[arrytus]

ayn rand, chuck palahniuk, martin amis, hemingway, dickens

[MystyrMystyry]

All of them and none of them

Might sound wishy washy, but it's such a subjective subject that it boils down to how well trained one is in observing and appreciating various aspects and qualities of a work of fiction (not to mention the author's intention)

There was a true tale I heard of a tribe living rough somewhere in Africa whom some anthropologists came across. They were amazed how no element of their lifestyle owed anything to the last two thousand years of civilisation.

Fearing that this tribe would one day be gobbled up by the march of progress if left to their own devices they returned with a television and satellite dish, thinking that some education of the outside world would be of benefit.

Everyday and every night every member of the tribe sat transfixed to the passing parade of images from the magic lantern, not bothered by disrupting questions from the intruders

The anthos began to wonder and worry if they'd done the right thing. Would this machine consume their culture instead of enhancing it?

Then suddenly one day about a month later, they noticed something about the tribesmen - they were no longer watching, but had returned to the way they were before the interlopers' arrival

Though a relief, it was also confusing

'Why have you all stopped watching?' one was asked

'That is a very clever machine,' he replied, 'and it tells many stories - but unfortunately it does not tell 'our' stories'

[Patrick_Bateman]

chuck palahniuk, dickens

Indeed, good man

hemingway

You imbecile.

[TheChilly]

Dan Brown = TERRIBLY overrated.

Same with John Steinbeck. Couldn't even get through "The Pearl" or even some of his short stories. Didn't capture my interest.