/lit/ - Literature

Always thought she looked like a girl Oney.

>>19082308
Oney is better looking, unfortunately

>>19081569
Why is it melodramatic? Pretty simple, people sacrifice actual communication by projecting what they want/need/desire onto those around them and blind themselves with their beliefs. Sort of a proto DFW. She unfortunately did not yet trust her skill and a few times literally spells out what she had already demonstrated so well, but despite that it is quite good for a first novel, better than most firsts.

>>19082566
Yep

>>19082566
Yeah pretty good book

>>19081569
She has such a bread face.

I liked that scene when the Union organizer and the black doctor meet and they start talking about their hopes and dreams but the Union guy is so focused on class and the doctor so focused on race that they can’t get past their differences to common ground.
I thought it was pretty well done for a 24 year old.
Put my 28 year old ass to shame

>>19082566
I enjoyed the story. Just finished reading it. Thought Micks music obsession and Willies Footloose reenactment were a bit out there. It's an incredible first novel though.
I don't see much praise for her other works. Can you see an improvement?

>>19082566
>Sort of a proto DFW
Hate to break it to you, retarded new fag, but she wrote before that charlatan and what you just described isn’t unique to DFW

>>19082566
>She unfortunately did not yet trust her skill

Why say this like you know her? You could have just said she was too on the nose with some of her writing, which is a matter of opinion and not fact but you had to talk down to her and criticise her like she's a student of yours. Not to mention the DFW reference that came out of nowhere which makes me think you just brought him up so you could brag about reading Infinite Jest; the comparison is not relevant at all, the only similarity between the two novels is the subject of communication which is not even unique or even done particularly well by DFW. And fyi Hal and Mr Singer not talking does not warrant a reference in your shallow assessment of this this novel, they are/become mute for completely different reasons.

>Pretty simple, people sacrifice actual communication by projecting what they want/need/desire onto those around them and blind themselves with their beliefs

Was not actually that 'simple'. You are forgetting all of the political, social and religious implications that McCullers addresses as a consequence of the characters' struggle to communicate. The novel is not limited to the local personal level at all. Maybe if McCullers wrapped it in some quirky post-modern style you would notice and I encourage you to re read it if thats honestly all you got out of it.

Very shit take and sums up the arrogance of /lit/ in general desu.

>>19082566
>proto dfw
What are you EVEN talking about

>>19082566
>Sort of a proto DFW.

>>19084659
>proto DFW
Hate to break it to you, retarded illiterate, but proto refers temporally to BEFORE.

Next time you to try to be an asshole to someone, you should make sure everything you type is factually correct.

>>19082322
Carson is a certified /lit/ cuties, she's up there with Sylvia Plath.

I like the girl that likes the piano. Her chapters are also really good. The Copeland, Blount and the inn guy, their chapters are truly awful though. Book would be better if you always followed Singer and that girl. Also idk how far you're in but when she loses her virginity, it's kinda hot.

>>19086041
>when she loses her virginity, it's kinda hot.

I thought they didnt have sex right they just naked together I think

>>19086053
Nah pretty sure they have sex. The guy even leaves town, that was kinda cute.

>>19085100
LMAOOOOOOO PROTO-DFW what the fuck does that even mean. I guess every writer is PROTO-DFW, you factually Retard and illiterate. You should legit Jill yourself for calling anyone’s style of writing as “PROTO-DFW.”

PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW PROTO-DFW

>>19082566
>proto DFW

Embarrassing

>>19082566
>Proto DFW

lol

>>19082566
>proto DFW

huh? Are you retarded?

>DFW
It is called a point of reference, you morons. Thanks for keeping the thread bumped.

>>19084654
She certainly improved over her career, literary critics tend to be of the mind that she never met the potential she shows with The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, but critics think a lot of things and not meeting ones potential is not the same as not improving. No idea why her other works get so little attention, most people seem to love The Heart is a Lonely Hunter but never go on to read anything else by her, but those that do tend to like her other work. Read her, she is good.

>>19084921
>Why say this like you know her?
Read her other works, she clearly saw it as a fault.
>You are forgetting all of the political, social and religious implications that McCullers addresses as a consequence of the characters' struggle to communicate
Do you not understand what "blind themselves with their beliefs" means?

>>19086806
>It is called a point of reference, you morons

Yes and a very embarrassing one. I would have abandoned the thread altogether if I were you but oh well.

>Read her other works, she clearly saw it as a fault.

Having read her other works doesn't give you the right to talk down to her in the way that you did. I have read all her novels too and I can see it as a valid criticism, I just had a problem with the way you said it as if she were an amateur writer asking for advice. She is a recognised author and one of the best in her generation, treat her with some respect.

>Do you not understand what "blind themselves with their beliefs" means?

Okey let's go back to your original reply where you said The Heart is a Lonely Hunter is 'Pretty simple'. Do you find the way she explored race relations with Dr Copeland as pretty simple? Or the failure of socialism to take hold in America despite poverty and discontent being desperately apparent? Or what about how the younger generation coped growing up in a post depression economy? None of these issues are remotely simple and all were intimately and introspectively explored. I don't know why you have failed to grasp the depth of the novel but I would honestly expect nothing less from someone who thought it would be appropriate to shoe horn in a reference to DFW in a completely irrelevant thread. Please go back and re-read and stop shitting out disrespectful half baked takes on /lit/.

>>19081569

>books that are proto DFW?

>>19086214
Ok keyboard warrior, you're about to get schooled.

1. You're assuming I'm the person who called Carson McCuller's proto-DFW. I am not. There's demerit number one.
2. proto is short for PROTOTYPE which is a preliminary model for something. You know like a TEST VERSION. So calling an author proto-DFW means they share many of the traits which make DFW's writing unique, BUT they did this before DFW. So not every writer can be proto-DFW. That's demerit number two.

GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE YOU ILLITERATE BRAINLET.

>>19087446
Proto reddit reply

>>19087142
Do you not understand that it was a single sentence summary of the main theme? Obviously the book is more complex in that explores the theme in depth, if it didn't she would have just written a single sentence instead of a 300 page novel. I never "talked down" to her, I just acknowledged that she was not perfect and had growing to do still.

>thought it would be appropriate to shoe horn in a reference to DFW in a completely irrelevant thread.
So what you are saying is that you do not actually understand what a point of reference is or it's purpose.

>>19087446
Mostly what I was saying is that DFW later explored the same themes as her, the main difference being that DFW explored cause, she explored effect. They both explored the same aspects of communication, not just communication itself. Sometimes I forget that this board does not actually read.

>>19087446
Proto onions reply

>>19087495
>Do you not understand that it was a single sentence summary of the main theme?

Yes and in that summary you called it simple you dumb faggot don't start telling lies when you just have to scroll up to see what you typed out.

>I never "talked down" to her

Yeah you did you retard, your tone was condescending and arrogant. Again all you have to do is scroll up so don't bother changing your words since you've been called out.

>So what you are saying is that you do not actually understand what a point of reference is or it's purpose.

It was completely out of place, unnecessary and not relevant. You're one of those faggots who reads Infinite Jest and brings it up at every possible opportunity and it is very cringe. There are so many authors who have written about struggling to communicate, you could have even used One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest as a 'point of reference' since it also has a deaf mute protagonist but you just HAD to drop in that you have read Infinite Jest. I really don't see why DFW is so important to bring up.

>I was saying is that DFW later explored the same themes as her, the main difference being that DFW explored cause, she explored effect. They both explored the same aspects of communication, not just communication itself.

omg he shits out another bad take! You think McCullers didn't explore cause? lol what book did you read? The entire character of Mick showed her going from a young optimistic young child to a bitter cynical adolescent as a result of the events in the novel. HER WHOLE CHARACTER SHOWED CAUSE. Every character had a fleshed out back story as to the reasons they struggled to communicate and found Singer so endearing.

And then saying DFW explored cause is even worse, I'm assuming you mean that he didn't explore effect then lol? I don't even know where to start with this one. Assuming you're talking about Infinite Jest I don't know how you boiled it down to 'the causes of struggling to communicate'. And don't back down on this one, I know you are going to come back and say 'uhhh thats not what I meant anon of course they both explored cause and effect' but no anon you just wrote that shit and pressed post.

>not just communication itself

This one is just wrong anon I don't know what to say.

Anon maybe you do read but I doubt you are reading properly if there are the opinions you have. Honestly this one is even more cringe than the proto DFW post, pleases leave the thread, you are embarrassing yourself.

>>19087495
>the main difference being that DFW explored cause

>>19082566
>proto DFW
The absolute state

>>19087674
The theme can be simply stated, why is that so difficult for you?
> There are so many authors who have written about struggling to communicate
There are, but none are as wide read here, few if any deal with it in the same way.
>I really don't see why DFW is so important to bring up.
It wasn't, you are the one making it a big thing. You are fixating on the insignificant as a way to be right. Do you identify more with Blout or Copeland?
>One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest
That is only a superficial point of reference, that would be stupid.
>And don't back down on this one,
I never brought up IJ but, if you insist. We get they cause for almost every single character and he explores it in great detail, effect is ultimately the same for all of the characters, the bulk of the novel is dedicated to the causes. It is the main purpose and he ultimately says that fixating on effect is part of the problem because that does not treat the cause, AA is just another carrot on a stick, treating the effects will never solve the problems, only treating the cause which we must first identify and understand.
>I'm assuming you mean that he didn't explore effect then lol?
>You think McCullers didn't explore cause?
You can not just ignore one and fixate on the other if you want your work to make sense, we get the effect with all of McCullers character, we get the cause with all of DFWs and we get some of the other with both of them.
>This one is just wrong anon
But you can not say why?

You would probably be able to make a better case for me embarrassing myself if you did not rely on ad hominem so much.

>>19087785
>The theme can be simply stated, why is that so difficult for you?

No you called the novel simple.

>There are, but none are as wide read here, few if any deal with it in the same way.
>It wasn't, you are the one making it a big thing. You are fixating on the insignificant as a way to be right.

It was a cringe thing to say anon, everyone is fixating on it because they are laughing at you.

>That is only a superficial point of reference, that would be stupid.

A lot more relevant than DFW.

>the bulk of the novel is dedicated to the causes. It is the main purpose and he ultimately says that fixating on effect is part of the problem because that does not treat the cause, AA is just another carrot on a stick, treating the effects will never solve the problems, only treating the cause which we must first identify and understand.

Anon I think you are confusing DFW's theory on addiction with literary theory in general. Yes Infinite Jest focuses on the causes of addiction but the narrative structure is not as simple as just focusing on cause over effect. There are plot points with conflict and resolution all over the novel, the eschaton fight and the incident with the parking outside the halfway house both act as climaxes of the novels events, they drive the narrative forward and contain within them causes and effects in themselves.

>You can not just ignore one and fixate on the other if you want your work to make sense

Didn't you just say DFW focused on cause lol? And yes you absolutely can, just referencing the classic dramatic structure which requires an exposition, conflict, climax and catharsis shows that what you call 'cause' dominates the structure of a traditional tragedy. It would be stupid to spend the entirety of your novel on catharsis over conflict.

>we get the effect with all of McCullers character

I don't really know what you mean by this lol. The desperate economic situation was the cause of Mick being forced into work, Dr Copeland's failure as a father and as a revolutionary was the cause for his illness and retirement, and the death of Antonopoulos and the loneliness it caused Mr Singer the cause for his suicide. These were ongoing plot points, there are causes literally all over the novel I don't know where you got this theory from but it certainly doesn't apply to McCullers at all.

>But you can not say why?

It was a very plainly false statement with no substantiation whatsoever. The Heart is a Lonely Hunter is literally about struggling to communicate and I don't know how to tell you that you are wrong other than reciting the plot to you.

>ad hominem

reddit

>this fucking thread

>>19083621
>She has such a bread face.

What did he mean by this?

>>19088150
You are conflating theme and plot, plot elements do not make up thematic cause and effect. Are you moving the goal posts or just stupid?

>>19088948
Write clearer then you proto faggot

>>19089092
How does my writing abilities affect your confusing plot and theme in IJ and THIALH? I guess stupid it is.

>>19089839
When attempting to describe theme in Infinite Jest you described structure and you also dodged half of my post as well sooo.