Let’s talk about living writers

let’s talk about living writers.

which are the best ones besides pic related? in terms of impact, talent, contribution to language

Attached: 62D7A429-F31D-4B56-830A-6BC178F7122A.jpg (682x1024, 276K)

I had fun reading McElroy, but Houellebecq is clearly the frontrunner.

he’s good but too postmodern. not in a negative way, just slightly older so he’s in another cluster. holly is sincere and dry, doesn’t employ ironic encryption, cuts deep and straight.

>reading for the plot: the author

Vollman >>>>>>>>>>>> French Goblin

>living writers
>implying Houellebecq isn't dead inside

Is Last Stories and Other Stories any good?

who?

no good writer is spiritually alive. you must be dead to give your works to print and give up editing your art.

So this is the type of euros that post the mutt face?

>smoking is a bitch: the person

as a russian i must say too good

his plots are pretty predictable honestly, I like his characters because they are terrible losers just like me.

*teleports behind you*

Attached: le redditeur.png (174x243, 45K)

Objectively the greatest living writer is Corncob or Pinecone.

>Corncob
who's that?

This

I liked Luarus when I read it

Attached: schemahegumen-anthony-agioantonides.jpg (300x292, 53K)

I love his characters, but I can never quite grasp if they're parodies and you should mock them or if you should agree with them and feel like shit.
I fear that I lean to both views

Attached: 1520449045133.jpg (576x768, 143K)

Luckily I identify with ruskies, so this should be good. Thanks user

>contribution to language

Are you serious? He requires middle school-level reading comprehension at best. His books are entertaining enough, but nobody here would give a shit about him were it not for all the carping on about 'muh western degeneracy, civilization is collapsing'.

The correct answer to your question is Krasznahorkai, who is THE best living writer, as well as one of the greatest writers of all time.

being readable is not a sin. he contributed to language by actively dismissing postmodern irony which, say, DFW preached without yeld

Pynchon

>he contributed to language by actively dismissing postmodern irony

You're actually retarded. But let's take your retarded assertion at face value: how is being stylistically reactionary, that is, relying on previously established modes of expression, not the exact OPPOSITE of making a new contribution to language?

Sure, DFW is bullshit, but his style is far from being the dominant style of contemporary lit. This isn't an either/or situation. Try to spend less time on this board and read more.

>Russian stamp of approval
truly the highest praise, thanks for the rec

But Faulkner's dead

He contributed more to miniature ivory statues in chinese dentist offices.

DeLillo

>dude murica lmao

AND??

Terrible opinion. He writes half-rate Burroughs bullshit for edgy teens.