Gene Wolfe

Have any of you read this authors work? I just finished "The Knight" and found it to be deplorable garbage. However the critics and many readers seem to think the man walks on water and writes pure gold, which confuses me. Anyone have a thought or two on the matter?

There are many authors like this: Stephen King (now), Nick McDonell, Even some of Vonnegut's work isn't that good.

But you can't really blame them (you can blame McDonell, since he only has one book which mommy and daddy published for him), but others are bound to contracts and such ...

This Wolfe guy, I've never heard of, I'm not real big on the author croud (there's far too many authors out there). But most of them suck ... so.

I'd never heard of him before either untill I picked up this book, and I don't think it's because of forced contract obligations... Of course I've also never heared of Nick McDonell or Vonnegut but I do know what you mean. many authors, after having established a reputation, go decidedly downhill and nobody seems to have the guts to tell them so.

You've never heard of Kurt Vonnegut?

See he's actually a good author :smile:
There's only one or two of his stories I remember not being too thrilled about.

Basically, his most known/main good books are: Ice 9, Cats Cradle, and Slaughterhouse Five.

Nick McDonell is younger then you and me by about two years or so. He published a book called "Twelve" that is about every fiasco that is associated with teenagers in the last decade mixed with "The Great Gatsby".

Not many of the characters have much development, which is kind of the point, but it's annoying. They're very 1-D. The main character is a drug dealer ... who's never done drugs. He supplies all the rich kids on the upper side of New York with whatever they ask for. And all these people are sterotypical rich snobs ... it's weird.

You can't really see where to book is going (you can at some points) because you don't know these characters. I think the main problem is their substance is missing, so you have no connections to them. The only way you can be anyway connected to this book is by the events, since they've happened in your lifetime, kind of how the Great Gatsby was incredibly boring and rediculous to me, since I didn't live in the 40s (or whenever), your mind pretty much fills everything in.

But this kid (McDonell) has gotten insane amounts of praise from critics and crap like that, being called things like "the voice of today's culture" and other such garbage.

One sad thing is, Hunter Thomas praises his book :sad:

Twelve Take a look ... its garbage though.

My reading is pretty much limited to the sci-fi/Fantasy genre so my knowledge of authors is pretty much limited to that sphere.

It's unfortunate that such lacking stories receive such critical acclaim. I am throughly convinced that most book reviewers are so preoccupied with searching for philosophical depth in a novel, that they overlook the facets that do, or in many cases do not make for a good engaging book.

Yeah. I forget what its called exactly, but there's this frame of mind (I suppose it's a condition, but we all do it) where people will find what they want where they want. Meaning, you can make this or that mean anything you want in some way or another.

Specifically speaking in the realm of 'art' or entertainment, it has a name, I can't remember it right now. But its basically where people say "This is what the author was thinking", in which that is a conclusion they came up with on their own and it most likely gets adopted by many other individuals. This is why when you read a book in school (mostly high schools) and they say "what does this mean" ... there isn't suppose to be a write or wrong answer, but the instructor is always looking for what is the accepted or their interpretation.

I remember a 'bit' being done of this situation in "Back to School" (Not that good, but its funny nonetheless). Dangerfield has to do a report on Slaughterhouse Five, I think, and so he actually get Kurt Vonnegut to come to his house and explain it to him. He writes the report and the instructor whines at him and says he's obviously never read anything written by Vonnegut, since his paper's views on the book differ greatly from everyone else's. I doubt that's actually true, but its funny, since it happens often.

I see. I hadn't know that Vonnegut was one of those "required reading" authors. I was home-schooled, and I think my parents specifically avoided introducing us to those authors because they remembered hating it when they had to read them. That certainly would explain my ignorance. It also explains why I'm just encountering this "my-interpretation-of-a-trash-book-means-it-is-wonderfull" mentality for the first time.

Hmm. Don't get me wrong though, Vonnegut is a good author (Give Slaughterhouse Five a read, it should only take you a day ... two tops).

I'm not new to the idea at all. My instructor in high school lowered my grade because in my paper on the great gatsby I pointed out all these flaws and how it doesn't matter today and all that garbage. I tried explaining that it doesn't matter how much "symbolism" you have, it sucks. She wasn't too trilled.

You're lucky and unfortunate to be home schooled. Lucky, since, obviously, your parents are fairly intelligent, You have a degree, that alone is saying more for your parents then numerous others who decide to home school their children. (most of them get a GED at some point and call it good).

You might be unlucky since the whole social thing would have happened later ... but you seem to have turned out well :smile:

But, I think as for authors blowing ass chunks, it really depends on the book. I mean, Stephen King is terrible ... but the Gunslinger series is good, there's all sorts of paradoxes floating around like that.

This thread needs more coloured avatars.

Now that schools out, I'm trying to rekindle my interest in reading. If
anyone could recommend some good books I'd appreciate it.

Just ordered these on amazon about an hour ago:

The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat

An Anthropologist on Mars

The Da Vinci Code

The Emerging Mind: The BBC Reith Lectures 2003

I hear people talking about The Da Vinci Code as a literary sensation all the time, but never ever here people actually talking about it. Anyone want to clue in a guy who tends to believe overnight sensations are usually crap? What's the reason for the fuss?

I haven't read it.

A_S, what type of genres do you like? (it'd be a bit easier to suggest things that way)

Da Vinci Code is a reasonably well written mystery-thriller. Nothing more. It has some plot weaknesses and such, but overall an enjoyable read.

I believe that all the sensation is because of some er... controversial subject matter. it has nothing to do with how talented the author was. He simply knew exactly which emotional-societal hot buttons to push. This should in no way be considered great literature.

<DIV>I just finished Digital Fortress by the guy who wrote Da Vinci Code. The storyline was OK, and the book became much more involved towards the end, but I must agree he isn't exactly the world's best author. He comes across as a faster-paced and less-experienced version of Tom Clancy.</DIV>
<DIV>.</DIV>
<DIV>I've said it before, I'll say it again: the best books I have ever read have all been by Robert Ludlum (now, err, deceased), my favourites being The Icarus Agenda, The Bourne Identity, The Bourne Supremacy and The Janson Directive. All of these sported AWESOME plots, full of twists, plenty of action, excellent use of tension - and most of all, they make you think.</DIV>

This is why when you read a book in school (mostly high schools)
and they say "what does this mean" ... there isn't suppose to be a
write or wrong answer, but the instructor is always looking for what is
the accepted or their interpretation.

...

My instructor in high school lowered my grade because in my paper on
the great gatsby I pointed out all these flaws and how it doesn't
matter today and all that garbage. I tried explaining that it doesn't
matter how much "symbolism" you have, it sucks. She wasn't too trilled.

Quoted for truth!

I do not believe that essays on novels are necessarily graded in the way you guys suggest. If you get a bad teacher, sure, they're just looking for right and wrong. But if you get a good one, they'll let you argue your point so long as you argue it. If you absolutely feel you need to be Mr. Breakthemould (and who doesn't), you're probably better off not writing an essay about how irrelevant the novel is, but by arguing another point of view. Find another angle that the symbolism can be viewed at, another way that the character's actions can be viewed. Certainly the themes of any well-written novel should fairly identifiable, but the exact stance on those themes is much more permutable. You can find futility of existence where someone else discovers justification for life, the universe and everything. But you gotta be smart about it; writing about how the book is irrelevant comes off as being a lazy jerk-off, not a progressive thinker.

But you gotta be smart about it; writing about how the book is irrelevant comes off as being a lazy jerk-off, not a progressive thinker.

Exactly. We used to peer review papers in high school and I remember reading people who wrote the same things as you - "I didn't like the book, it made no sense and was about the 1940s and not the modern times. So it sucked and I'm not going to write about it." There's a lot to be taken from books like The Great Gatsby.
Vonnegut's work is a lot like this though. There's a lot in it if you read into it (or in the case of Breakfast of Champions, if you're even slightly aware while you read) but otherwise it seems to come off as just bad sci-fi.

I'm sorry, but The Great Gatsby is a worthless piece of s**t that has no right to be forced upon high schoolers. All I can remember about the book besides my blinding hatred of it is how retarded the symbolism is. It's so obvious that every detail like the 'glasses on the billboard' just screams "symbolism!" so loud in your ear that it bleeds. It's like its written for dense people or four year olds so they can feel smart. The book is boring as hell to boot, and if I ever hear anyone say 'West Egg' I will punch them in the face. Every facet of that book is annoying. This book and Black Boy were the only books I hated reading in school.

Do I get an A?