Forum
Community Forum
Today's Posts
FAQ & Rules
Members List

Writing
Writing Forum
Recent Posts
Critique Guidelines

Groups
YWO Social Groups
Facebook
Myspace

Chat
 
YWA

Register

Store
Support YWO
YWO Merchandise
The Book Despository
Amazon.com (US)
Amazon.co.uk (UK)
Amazon.ca (Canada)

SBS Mag


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-30-2014, 01:16 AM View Post #11 (Link)
Dabs (Offline)
Freelance Writer
 
Dabs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,885
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 151
Originally Posted by lostbookworm View Post
I would say that calling any work of literature that you find offensive to you to be 'revolting' to the idea of art is, perhaps not using it lightly, but certainly over-reacting. Many Japanese writers consider Murakami to be an affront to art, or at very least their idea of literature. To say, 'Oh, this work is overly technical and I can't connect to the characters. Ergo, it is an affront to art.', is irresponsible.

Art is not singularly your definition of what you believe art is. As I said before, I highly doubt there are any works that are affronts, unless they are horrifyingly terrible and hold themselves up as brilliant pieces of work (which happens very, very rarely). I would still argue that there are no affronts to art, as art is an entirely subjective idea for all humans. It may be an affront to your idea of what art is, but not the entirety of art.
I'm not arguing with you. I haven't been arguing with you. I'm not in real disagreement with you. And I'm not going to continue this discussion. The end.
  
						Last edited by Dabs; 04-30-2014 at 01:19 AM.
					
					Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2014, 08:37 AM View Post #12 (Link)
lostbookworm (Offline)
Freelance Writer
 
lostbookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Among the Fires of Hell
Posts: 1,023
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 96
I wasn't arguing with you, Dabs, I just put out why I thought your view was wrong. I'm sorry if you thought I was being argumentative and sad you'll no longer be part of the discussion. Again, sorry if I offended you in any way.
__________________
and he saw himself nailed to the cross of his own cradle and coffin
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 09:19 PM View Post #13 (Link)
Spacepirate (Offline)
Creative Fanatic
 
Spacepirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 814
Points: 22.28
Times Thanked: 99
Fascinating paragraph from an utterly pretentious article, as per, by Will Self:
The main objection to this is, I think, at once profoundly commonsensical and curiously subtle. The literary critic Robert Adams observed that if postmodernism was to be regarded as a genuine cultural era, then it made modernism itself a strangely abbreviated one. After all, if we consider that all other western cultural eras – classicism, medieval, the Renaissance – seem to average about half a millennium a piece, it hardly matters whether you date modernism's onset to Rousseau, Sturm und Drang or Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, it clearly still has a long way to go. By the same token, if – as many seem keen to assert – postmodernism has already run its course, then what should we say has replaced it, post-postmodernism, perhaps? It would seem better all round to accept the truth, which is that we are still solidly within the modernist era, and that the crisis registered in the novel form in the early 1900s by the inception of new and more powerful media technologies continues apace. The use of montage for transition; the telescoping of fictional characters into their streams of consciousness; the abandonment of the omniscient narrator; the inability to suspend disbelief in the artificialities of plot – these were always latent in the problematic of the novel form, but in the early 20th century, under pressure from other, juvenescent, narrative forms, the novel began to founder. The polymorphous multilingual perversities of the later Joyce, and the extreme existential asperities of his fellow exile, Beckett, are both registered as authentic responses to the taedium vitae of the form, and so accorded tremendous, guarded respect – if not affection.
  
						Last edited by Spacepirate; 05-02-2014 at 09:32 PM.
					
					Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2014, 10:18 PM View Post #14 (Link)
lostbookworm (Offline)
Freelance Writer
 
lostbookworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Among the Fires of Hell
Posts: 1,023
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 96
See, that doesn't make much sense. Literary periods are not facts, but labels created by academics. If academics deem the modernist era to be over, it probably is over. The public uses the term. Self makes a point regarding the half-millenia idea, but it all leads towards his point of literature being dead. (Which it isn't.) I would argue that modernism/post-modernism will become an era much akin to the Renaissance - there are periods within periods. What we deem to be modernism is not equatable to the Renaissance, thus his point is both correct and moot.

EDIT: If the above makes no sense it is because I am tired and it is late.
__________________
and he saw himself nailed to the cross of his own cradle and coffin
  
						Last edited by lostbookworm; 05-02-2014 at 10:47 PM.
					
					Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools

 


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:08 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 - Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All writing Copyright © its author(s). All other material Copyright © 2007-2012 Young Writers Online unless otherwise specified.
Managed by Andrew Kukwa (Andy) and Shaun Duke (Shaun) from The World in the Satin Bag. Design by HTWoRKS.