Is this more difficult than JR? Worth reading?

I've not read all of JR, in fact, I've only made it about 20 pages in. So I can't really comment.

But the recognitions is all about signaling and signification. If you want to think of realism as the defining feature of post-enlightenment literature, then this book becomes an essential component of a conversation started, implicitly by the romantics, ultimately by realism itself as reactionary redefinition and re-subjugation of the ideas of personhood and meaning put forth by the romantics in the wake of, and against, the enlightenment, which centered everything around the individual.

So if you like that idea, and think taking Flaubert as de-idealization and then Proust, Joyce, Gaddis, Pynchon, ?, as working to further the scope of this realizing of the nature of the individual, and what seems in retrospect as the inevitable destruction of the enlightenment individual [but not the displacement] by the inclusion memory distortion, ego, sensory distortion, formative distortion, then yeah go nuts. It's a great read.

Of course, you needn't that obviously idiosyncratic idea of dialogue over the essence of subject to appreciate the work. It may even be a hinderance, but I live to hinder.

It's just dialogue; so a sentence here and there. If possible, read it on a kindle so that you can just highlight and it will translate.

So many words, so little weight. I hope you're not paying for your education.

I'm not. That's why I've concocted such an idiosyncratic narrative literature obvs.

Woe woe all these torsive forces of distortion.

How derivative of Chavenet.

>But the recognitions is all about signaling and signification. If you want to think of realism as the defining feature of post-enlightenment literature, then this book becomes an essential component of a conversation started, implicitly by the romantics, ultimately by realism itself as reactionary redefinition and re-subjugation of the ideas of personhood and meaning put forth by the romantics in the wake of, and against, the enlightenment, which centered everything around the individual.
>So if you like that idea, and think taking Flaubert as de-idealization and then Proust, Joyce, Gaddis, Pynchon, ?, as working to further the scope of this realizing of the nature of the individual, and what seems in retrospect as the inevitable destruction of the enlightenment individual [but not the displacement] by the inclusion memory distortion, ego, sensory distortion, formative distortion, then yeah go nuts. It's a great read.
>Of course, you needn't that obviously idiosyncratic idea of dialogue over the essence of subject to appreciate the work. It may even be a hinderance, but I live to hinder.
wat

good effort though, it may be a bit obtuse but if everyone put as much effort into their posts as you do then this would be a much much better board

post took me like five min, I'm not married to it

thanks for the sentiment though, you are stand up

Have fun in the real world where you will soon come to realise everyone is laughing at your affectation and pretentiousness behind your back, or flat out telling you you're a moron. Obfuscating a paragraph with dense langauge and throwaway words that can literally be applied to anything like "recontexulize", "pastiche", "deconstruction", "relativism", "retroactively", etc. Doesn't make you smart.

Here ya go, I'll do it too regarding DFW:

"Wallace retroactively reasserts his vision by recontextualizing his own work behind a mask of endless self-reflexivness and reinserts it into the framework of the post modernist tradition owing to the strong undercurrents that post enlightenment modernism still flow through the text. If modernism was about crafting an individual self in the face of a collective, post modernism is continuously eroding and effacing the individual and his autonomy within a post industrial media landscape that is constantly shifting".

>he has a fucking trip now.

All of my keks.

dfw produces a confessional variety of literature wich actively evades confrontation and is ultimately disengaging--you can scrap him together as a commentator on identity evasion--but better to scrap him altogether

dwf certainly fucking sucks, he is in no way the logical ? that follows pynchon

Where to start with Gaddis?

trap sprung bitch, I only donned it to suss those who know what a trip is from those who don't

Who are you even?

It's a passive confrontation and psychical discourse between the reader and author that ultimately hinges on self reflexive ,cyclical and tangential inner dialogue that asks the reader to confront why he is even bothering to read in the first place. It actively attempts to provide some kind of panacea to ho humans constantly get caught in ideological traps and find a way to get over that through human decency and emotion rather that detached post modern irony.

I could write these meaningless slabs of text and continue responding to you all day, because you're a fucking fraud who hasnt got an original or interesting thought in their head. You choose to be evasive with language to disguise your lack of intellect.

>being this deluded.

It's a horrible night to have autism.

stop ruining my thread pls

in dreadful deeds. our sole delight

The rec or j r. J R is the funniet book you will ever read, holy.

hey!

It is literally filled with memes.
The chips
the film cans
the faucet
HOLY
mazola
the tub
pencil couch
one shoe
the tub
Wall footprints
bast
bast not getting paid
drunk gibbs
school tvs
towns people with access to them
the pincipal
mail away
portfolios

fuck i could go on forever

do you not narrate intrinsically, I never claimed that post was anything other than an idiosyncratic hiccup of personal perversion, but I believe it

if you're putting this much energy into making a tired point about "obfuscation" then at least actually attack me at the points where I obfuscate, can you do it? do you have it in you?

>repetition in a story written by one person constitutes memes
I hope you die.

Thanks, I'm a fan of funny books. Almost finished with Don Quixote, might try JR next.

Don Quixote plays a significant role in this book.

This book is Gaddis' masterpiece.

Read it. Just fucking read it. It's awesome.

I wish I could read Don Quixote as if it was the first time reading it again. That book is one of my favourites now no doubt.