[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 252 KB, 464x568, Screen Shot 2020-05-31 at 8.29.19 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15492971 No.15492971 [Reply] [Original]

What are you thoughts on writers/artists doing interviews? Is it helpful or should the creator not speak? Would we not speculate on Shakespeare had interviews been transcribed back then? Would Pynchon be less interesting?

>> No.15493073

bump

>> No.15493264

Once more

>> No.15493418

Third bumps the charm

>> No.15493475

Bumpy

>> No.15493521

Bumps

>> No.15493558

>>15492971

Just don't talk too much on subjects you don't know

>> No.15493866

>>15493558
???
I didn't phrase the question correctly. I'm asking if you think it's better to let the art speak for itself, and that creators should not talk about their work.

>> No.15493923

>>15493558
Based.
THREAD CLOSED.

>> No.15493986

>>15493923
But...but I...

>> No.15494007

What are your favorite lit interviews?

>> No.15494067

>>15492971
OP, the pic you posted wasn't an interview. You can see Nab reading from his index cards.

>> No.15494256

>>15493866
yes, the authors should give their own interpretations. if a pseud says something idiotic I want a source I can throw in his dumb face. Like people saying La Peste is about the war. It is not. Camus said so.
>>15494007
DFW, Harold Bloom, Hannah Arendt, Norman Mailer versus Susan Sontag, Kerouac

>> No.15494284

>>15494067
this, I read somewhere that Nabby wrote all of his answers for interviews beforehand, and would not answer anything that wasnt agreed on before

>> No.15494363

>>15494067
I was originally going to post DFW in the German interview but there were like three fucking pics of him floating about at the time

>> No.15494411

>>15494256
So I guess lit professors better pack their bags because they'd be out of a job lol

>> No.15494415

I think it can give a deeper insight into the author's intentions both in content and style as well as provide context for their writing. However, a shitty interviewer can prevent any of that from occurring. The question "where do you get your ideas?" pops up way too often and the author usually just responds with an "um... I don't know. I just think of it."
I enjoyed this interview with Donald Barthelme, but that stupid question still occurs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjokr7W1ixk&t=40s

>> No.15494433

>>15494411
one pair of dubs was not enough to signify you were talking truth

>> No.15495087
File: 71 KB, 325x273, 1588643127136.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15495087

>>15494433
>>15494411

>> No.15495289

>>15492971
It's neither helpful nor unhelpful. It is interesting, but in principle should be only supplementary to the actual texts.
>Would Pynchon be less interesting?
If you mythologized him in your mind and in an interview he turned out to be much more of a normal fellow, then I guess that would take away something from his image, but IMO it ought not to affect our judgement of his texts to some significant degree.

>>15494256
If somebody says something idiotic you should be able to use the text itself to explain why it is not a valid interpretation, rather than relying on such external data. This mostly just shows that you want the easiest way to be right rather than to know what is right.
For what it's worth, most writers from history did not give a single interview, while there are also recent cases of writers explicitly avoiding them or offering interpretations that really make no sense or reduce the value of the text (Hemingway - The Old Man and the Sea is literally just about an old man fishing; Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451 is about TV).

>> No.15495410

>>15495289
>>quoting the author himself
>easiest way to be right
I know it's a cheap shot, but sometimes it's the only way.
>The Old Man and the Sea is literally about an old man fishing
Hem defined what it means to be based

>> No.15495433

I like authors that show their personality and opinions on the human condition. I like when they talk about their writing style and process, but I don't think they need to talk specifically about the book itself. The piece should be able to speak on its own without the context of the writers intent, but it is interesting to know the person behind the book and be able to extrapolate the meaning of who they are and the work itself. I don't want them to be explicit is all.

>> No.15495521

>>15493558
What if you don't know shit

>> No.15495540

>>15495289
>Fahrenheit 451 is about TV
What's wrong with that?

>> No.15495745

>>15495410
>sometimes it's the only way.
>Hem defined what it means to be based
As I said above - you want the easiest way to be right rather than to know what is right.

>>15495540
It was his response to the readings that see it as a more general commentary on censorship, and it pretty much kills any book to reduce it to such a particular problem. Today TV is not a problem because we have far worse media and even greater disinterest in truth and knowledge, yet F451 still means something, it is not deprecated or outdated (just like any other work of literature, no matter how old). Therefore, its meaning is obviously not merely criticism of TV.