How complex is the underworld compared to the tunnel and gravitys rainbow?
What's the point of maximalism? Why write crap books when you can write good ones?
>>7807333
It's really just Delillo writing a nostalgic period piece and wrapping some high concept shit around it because he didn't want to come off as being sentimental and uncool. It's a decent read but it is nowhere near the level of GR.
>>7807341
You've answered it yourself.
>>7807333
>the underworld
Can you actually obtain Women and Men? Why do we always include it in these threads
>>7807407
kindle
>>7807407
Have you triedthe library?
>>7807341
What's the point of reading when you can just have sex?
>>7807680
yeah
>>7807333
Neither Underworld nor Gravity's Rainbow compares to the complexity of The Tunnel, but, then again, few things do.
>>7807333
Call me pleb, but I cannot stand maximalist writing. Minimalist chart, anyone?
>>7807689
I only read because I have no qt to have sex with, though
>>7807767
minimalist writers reek of insecurity
>>7807689
>implying I can have sex
Good joke, senpai
>>7807407
Amazon
>>7807767
Beckett, for starters. Carver too, I guess. Hemingway might be good too. Borges is a strange blend between maximalism and minimalism.
>>7807941
How is Beckett minimalist?
>>7807767
Japanese writers are pretty minimalistic.
>>7807941
I got his complete short prose and I don't get it. Is his trilogy as abstract and nonsensical?
>>7807941
Ellis blends the two, also. Glamorama is maximalist minimalism.
>>7808010
Is this post satire? jesus fucking christ
>>7807964
If you don't think he's a minimalist you're probably thinking of his novels (though arguably there's some minimalism there as well). Read his theatre. It's all about the loss of language, the inability to truly grasp what you talk about, and how the only logical consequence to this is silence. Some of his plays don't even have words; hell, they barely have action.
>>7807767
Kjell Askilsen should be there.
>>7808002
Yes, and even more so.
Watch and read his longer plays (Godot and Endgame), then his shorter plays (Come and Go, Not I, Breath, Play, A Piece of Monologue), then go to his short prose again and see if they make sense to you now. You can also start with his less abstract novels, like Watt and Murphy. Personally I'm not very fond of his poetry, though some of it I like (Cascando, particularly).
He is not difficult at all once you get a hold of his style and ideas.
>>7808057
Yeah, I jumped into him without any background knowledge on him as an author and I feel like that's a big mistake, especially due to the avant garde nature of his work. I tell people I've read Waiting for Godot but, uh, haven't. Would you recommend definitely watching it over reading it? In general I like reading plays more than watching them.
>>7807333
I feel like Gaddis is just a meme, and I'm not missing out on anything by not reading anything by him.
>>7808150
I definitely recommend watching them and reading them, though the order depends entirely upon you (I prefer to read them before watching them, because otherwise I never know what the actors are saying).
For Beckett, watching it is a must. I really like this version, all of the actors are fucking amazing (except Estragon, but some times because he sounds too affected; otherwise, he is great too). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqpjddXaw4E
I think you may need context in order to understand Beckett. Unfortunately I don't have any sources for you, but I suppose that reading the wiki articles on existencialism, theatre of the absurd, Beckett, and the avant-garde movement will suffice (you don't have to read them completely, just make sure you understand what they are on about, especially the theatre of the absurd, although some critics argue that such a term is rubbish, and to an extent it is, but it still gives us a framework with which we can work). Perhaps some acquaintance with the work of Camus would be good, but I don't think it necessary.
In a few words: read and watch the play(s).
>>7808168
Yeah, I've read some Camus and a bit on existentialism, but that was when I was an edgy 17 year old. I'll definitely check that shit out. I'm very unfamiliar with avant garde literature in general (I've read a bit of Gertrude Stein and really appreciate her focus on phoenetics, but I'm honestly not even sure if she is considered avant garde), so getting a handle on the movement would certainly help. I'll definitely read the plays first, then watch them. Thanks for the tips, my man.
>>7808250
No problem, I'm glad I could help. I hope you come to enjoy Beckett as much I do, he was a fucking genius. At some point you will start recognizing patterns in his plays, such as certain themes and metaphors, and thus it might become redundant, but I think that is the mark of a major writer: one who chooses one theme and develops it to the point lf exhaustion.
Also, you should read some Joyce, specially Ulysses and some FW, since Beckett was very much influenced by him (at one point B was J's secretary, and J dictated some parts of the Wake to B).
>>7808023
>It's all about the loss of language, the inability to truly grasp what you talk about, and how the only logical consequence to this is silence.
It displays the phenomena of what you have listed, it isn't merely 'about' these things. It is against logical consequences, or a display of their inhuman functioning and dysfunctioning (or non-functioning).
>>7807713
really? what kind of second-rate city do you live in? yuck.
buy it on ebay.
DeLillo and Pynchon aren't even in the same ball park, difficulty-wise. Underworld is a pretty easy read.
Is the Tunnel very hard to read?
>>7807407
amazon for about $100
>>7807333
HOW DO I GET INTO/READ THESE BOOKS/BECOME SMART/EDUCATED ENOUGH TO READ THESE BOOKS
>>7809412
pick one
read it or at least start
if you don't get it get some supplementary material
but but but don't start with these
like for Pynchon don't start with GR start iwht crying of lot 49 or inherent vice
etc.
just find an author you want to start with and make a thread asking where to start
>>7809454
WHERE DO I START WITH PYNCHON
>>7809467
>>7809412
Read the text itself carefully and supplement with criticism / scholarship. Not every book on the list is worthy of that sort of attention, though. DFW really is a meme - certainly not worthy of comparison to any of the other authors, even Bolaño.
>>7809475
OK. I THINK I WILL READ "THE CRYING OF LOT 49" FIRST. WHAT DO YOU THINK ARE THE MERITS OF MEDITATION, I STARTED READING MORE RECENTLY AND JUST READ A BOOK ON THAT
>>7809481
don't listen to him David Foster Wallace isn't a meme and is in fact worth reading
>>7809400
Yes--very. Though parsing its sentences isn't too hard (which I can't begin to say about McElroy's novels), actually understanding his ideas, which it is absolutely full of, is extremely difficult and, at times, if you don't know anything about philosophy, impossible. That said, I would still give it a read, since its more obvious aspects--prettypretty prose, the opportunity to get inside the head of the most despicable character ever written--are quite enjoyable. If you do read it, remember: Gass is smarter than you and infinitely more well-read than you (he purportedly owns 19,000 books); and if he does something strange, there is a reason for it.
>>7809484
I READ CONSIDER THE LOBSTER, HIS SHORT STORY ABOUT THE WOMAN WITH DEPRESSION, AND SOME OF "GOOD OLD NEON" AND LIKED THEM ALL PERSONALLY.
>>7809503
OVERALL IT SEEMS LIKE A HEALTHY PRACTICE BUT AT THE START OF THE BOOK HE TALKED A LITTLE ABOUT PAST LIVES AND LEVITATING WHICH IM NOT ON BOARD WITH
>>7809475
dfw is better than pynchon
>>7809519
I'm sure it is healthy. The supernatural elements just seem like social / cultural accretions.
>>7809535
No. If Wallace lived longer he could've surpassed him, though.
>>7808155
Yeah that's the way you should develop as a reader, never take suggestions of wonderful authors because someone suggested it.
>>7809493
fuck off gassposter
>>7808019
Brett is that you
>>7807407
Yes. If you use aggregate book sale sites like bookfinder.com and check them reliably. With some patience I managed to get a first edition hardback for $25 in good condition after only a month or so, and I've seen non-first edition copies since in the $30-50 range. It's still expensive for a book but not comparative to the price it usually commands.
