Rediscovering the classics

[Queersetti]

oh ok How many stories did he write? Where did he write them? How many movies have been adapted from his tales?

KM, good to see you around. You still haven't shown me your list of credentials. Perhaps you are bullshitting? That'd be my guess.

As we all know, the true measure of a writer's talent is how many movies have been made from their work.

 

[sunstruck]

oh ok How many stories did he write? Where did he write them? How many movies have been adapted from his tales?

Do you know ANYTHING about his actual works? Anything at all? One thing. Come on! ONE thing!

 

[Guest]

Sure, Scott X, I'm going to tell you my name.

did I request that? No, I asked for a list of clients you worked for but knowing you, you'd lie about that like you lie about being an editor.
Now enough out of you 4, this thread was not meant to be a flame war.

 

[Guest]

Do you know ANYTHING about his actual works? Anything at all? One thing. Come on! ONE thing!

obviously you dont since you avoid the questions. Just admit you dont know about his works, no big deal.

 

[Olivianna]

Now enough out of you 4, this thread was not meant to be a flame war.

Four? No, we are many more than that.

 

[Guest]

Four? No, we are many more than that.

or so you want it to be. This thread is about classics and authors, not your obsession w/ me.

 

[sunstruck]

Ugh. I'm not waisting my night amusing you Scot.

Maybe tomorrow this thread will be back on topic and interesting again.

 

[Guest]

Can you even name one of them? Ask a question about the story itself? You haven't, so you can't.

He's written probably about 100 stories, twice that in poetry (T.S. Elliot) and essays and articles.

I have no fucking clue how many of his books have been made into movies, do enlighten us.

What does TS Elliot have to do w/ him?
Anyway, he wrote 120 stories, at least 10 of which were made into films. He died at the age of 43 of Chrones disease. His correspondent was Harry Houdini. I did the work for you, you're welcome.

 

[Guest]

Ugh. I'm not waisting my night amusing you Scot.

well, you are amusing. Pick another author, one which you are familiar with.

 

[KillerMuffin]

"What has been absent from criticism of Lovecraft is a discussion of how his mechanistic materialist vision of the world and his insistence of humanity's insignificance in the universe relate to the greater scheme of Western philosophy, specifically Kant's notion of the sublime. Lovecraft's use of the Kantian sublime is the crucial feature that sets his work apart from others', giving it that characteristic sense of awe and wonder which makes his stories so powerful."

I found that whilst using a search engine ScottX has never heard of: LION (we can all giggle daintily at him now). It's actually an interesting precept, given that I've never actually read Lovecraft nor am I into Western philosophy. I'm into eco-criticism these days.

However, this does make for an interesting perspective into the literature and I have been interested in Kantian sublime for a bit. I like the almost dichotomous notion hidden in the depths of Kant's definition of sublime. How it applies to Lovecraft, however, is going to be a mystery to me for a while.

I'm in the throes of Emerson tonight. I have a literature class tomorrow. I'm a quarter of the way through my third literature class (that's 2 1/4 more than Scott's had).

 

[Queersetti]

well, you are amusing. Pick another author, one which you are familiar with.

Emily Bronte.

 

[wetangel]

I just love to read, I just wish I had more time. The classics are the best. My fave...Gone with the Wind! I never get sick of it. I have to say though, I still love my romance/smut novels.

 

[Hamletmaschine]

Originally posted by medjay
No, I don't think those art classes should be eliminated. But I do think that it is unreasonable to assume someone can only be qualified to judge said arts if they are "trained" in them.

It's easy to pass judgment on art--the easiest thing in the world.

Stephen King's novels are trash.

See? I haven't even read him, and I can pass judgment on him.

I doubt that anyone (except maybe DeScott) would accept that as a valid judgment, however, unless I could back it up with some evidence and reasoning. Learning how to do that requires some training.

If an artist creates a work in a purely emotional, passionate and instinctive frame of mind then that work should be able to be appriciated on the same basis.

lol ... now who's laying down the law about how things should be evaluated?

Likewise, many artists have no clue or tangible reason why their muse chose to move them in a certain direction. When pressed, they are often unable to explain their own work and it stands to reason that someone experiencing that work should not be expected to articulate why it moves them. (You also have artists who, when placed in this sticky situation, will just lie and tell people what they want to hear. I'm certain there are many "classic" works of art that were concieved in the midst of some drug or alcohol induced frenzy and their creators would probably laugh if they were to see the class discussions aimed at dissecting and finding meaning in what could possibly have been regarded as abominable hackwork as far as the artist was concerned.)

You seem to be falling prey to the critical fallacy of intentionalism. You suggest that I have to understand how an artist intended the work or that I have to know their frame of mind when they made it in order to understand it properly--or if the artist didn't know what the hell he or she was up to, then I have to keep my mouth shut and can't presume to say what it means. That's nonsense. The artist doesn't own the meaning of his or her work. Just because the artist can't tell you what it means doesn't mean it has no meaning.

Certainly, artists can laugh their asses off listening to the things people find in their work. Hell, I laugh my ass off all the time listening to the things people assume about me based on statements I make here.


I do believe classes in the arts are necessary and relevant if only for introducing people to things they might otherwise have no occasion to experience. I do not believe any sort of artistic talent can taught, however. That is something inate that you are either born with or you're not (despite what schools may tell you to convince you to spend your money there). Classes and training can help you to hone your talents and teach you basic, practical foundations nescessary to that art, but if that gift isn't in you to begin with, it will never be.


Ack! Now who is being the elitist!? The whole thrust of modern art has been toward a democratized art practice--demystifying the cult of "genius" or "creativity" in order to help make more people producers rather than mere consumers of art.

Making art is easy, once you get over your inhibitions and fears and doubts, and learn a few simple techniques. It might not become "classic," but who says it has to be, right?


You really can't wait for someone to convince you King is worth your time. All you can do is take it upon yourself to read some of his stuff and make an informed opinion on your own. You may love it or you may hate it but at least you'll have a foundation for your stance.

At this point, I don't think I'll have time for him until I retire. Hopefully, his books will still be in print then.

 

[mischevious eye]

Of today's classics it would have to be books by Clancy and Grisham, for pure humor give me Robert Aspirin's M.Y.T.H. series.

The best one to reread is Edgar Rice Burroughs' Tarzan series or even his John Carter Warlord of Mars series.

 

[Hamletmaschine]

i just want to know what books hamlet finds worth several reads. is that so much to ask?

The Holy Bible. I love fantasy novels.

 

[Olivianna]

I'm a quarter of the way through my third literature class (that's 2 1/4 more than Scott's had).

Oh yeah? Do you know what F. Dostoevsky liked to eat for breakfast? Do you know where Flaubert bought his vegetables? Hmmm?

 

[sunstruck]

Oh yeah? Do you know what F. Dostoevsky liked to eat for breakfast? Do you know where Flaubert bought his vegetables? Hmmm?

LMAO! Damn it! I was going to ask her what size shoe Chaucer wore!

 

[Queersetti]

What does TS Elliot have to do w/ him?
Anyway, he wrote 120 stories, at least 10 of which were made into films. He died at the age of 43 of Chrones disease. His correspondent was Harry Houdini. I did the work for you, you're welcome.

H.P. Lovecraft was born on August 20, 1890 and died on March 15,1937. Do the math.

He lived with his mother until he was 31, and with his aunts after that. His wife divorced him because she was Jewish and he expressed strong anti-semitic opinions. He turned down the editorship of Weird Tales in part because he despised the ethnic mix of New York City.

Nice role model, Scotty.

 

[Guest]

H.P. Lovecraft was born on August 20, 1890 and died on March 15,1937. Do the math.

He lived with his mother until he was 31, and with his aunts after that. His wife divorced him because she was Jewish and he expressed strong anti-semitic opinions. He turned down the editorship of Weird Tales in part because he despised the ethnic mix of New York City.

Nice role model, Scotty.

never said he was my role model but again, you jump to conclusions because the truth scares you. btw, it doesnt matter if he was anti-semetic. Many authors have some sort of prejudice.
You were trying to prove something right?

 

[Guest]

Stephen King's novels are trash.

See? I haven't even read him, and I can pass judgment on him.

I doubt that anyone (except maybe DeScott) would accept that as a valid judgment, however, unless I could back it up with some evidence and reasoning. Learning how to do that requires some training.
[/B]

I've seen people post arguments worse than that. I HAVE read King and my opinion is mine alone, I dont force it upon anyone unlike some here.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Oh yeah? Do you know what F. Dostoevsky liked to eat for breakfast? Do you know where Flaubert bought his vegetables? Hmmm?

Yeah! F. Dostoevsky had Smirnoff and Eggs Benedict every day. Flaubert bought his vegetables in Pike's Market in Seattle every Thursday. He was fond of daikon.

LMAO! Damn it! I was going to ask her what size shoe Chaucer wore!

He wore size 12 and preferred Nike. You know what they say about the size of a man's feet. Heh.


Do I get my Masters degree in Literature now?

 

[Queersetti]

never said he was my role model but again, you jump to conclusions because the truth scares you. btw, it doesnt matter if he was anti-semetic. Many authors have some sort of prejudice.
You were trying to prove something right?

I proved you can't do math.

 

[Guest]

I proved you can't do math.

OH NO, I was off by a few years. Take shelter from the wrath of Q!
Getting back to topic, I enjoyed Fahrenheit 451, The Odyssey, 1984, Frankenstein, The Outsiders, and Lord of the Flies.

 

[KillerMuffin]

I liked Lord of the Flies as well. Though it's just too simple to sit there and draw parallels to Leviathan, it's still irresistable. Did anyone ever decide who ultimately played, and perchance failed, as Golding's Leviathan?

"So that in the nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory. "

 

[oh21]

all I saw was you and Rhys coming onto me. Try again.

Don't flatter yourself.