Better than Infinite Jest

>contenders for greatest novel of the last twenty years.
What does it even have for competition? Brief History of Seven Killings?

Disagreed. The whole part with the dead gang or whatever was a bit shit. "Oh, we can just dig through time, but don't forget everything's still pre-ordained." I couldn't make it work personally. Didn't mind the book though, definitely wasn't as hard to read as some other doorstoppers.

>Brief History of Seven Killings
Too small in scope.

Look bro, I'm enjoying the heck out of it, but to say that Moore has total command of language is a bit much, when in fact he doesnt know when to stop. He has no breaks, no constraint, no subtlety. His characters arrive at cosmos bending life changing epiphanies every other paragraph in the most clever well constructed introspective prose, and while it's fun to read and it gives ya the ol' feelio's, it's not very realistic. It's for people with low attention spans that need action on every page and it gets a bit stale after a while. Especially with his over descriptive prose. Like I said, fun, but overwrought.

What's it about?

>It's for people with low attention spans that need action on every page
>over descriptive prose
you can't be serious

I loved it but I've never read IJ
He's actually a good writer desu not that you'd know because you everyone else here won't fucking read it
>its for people with low attention spans
'Tism

Very serious. He spends paragraphs upon paragraphs bring up and mentioning the cobblestones and chimneys and rays of light. Mostly visual.

wardine be cry was like one five page chapter out of a thousand page novel.
i know its become a meme since it made #1 on the Veeky Forums list however many years ago,but it is still a great book.
more interesting than anything ive read in last few years by far.

lol

you really got me there
BTFO for sure
i take it back, i hate IJ now.

Can you clarify if this is the best book you have read in the last few years or the best book you've read that was WRITTEN in the last few years? The latter is understandable if you're a classicist or something, but Infinite Jest is pure dreck. It's Stephen King for when you turn 21.

it was the book i ENJOYED reading most in the past year.
And that time span includes Moby Dick, Journey to the End of the Night, One Hundred Years of Solitude (which was a close second) and a few more.
I'm not saying its the greatest book written in the last whatever. All I meant was that I had a good time reading it. It kept my attention better than the other things I've read.
Plus I have had addiction issues in my day, so all the AA/Ennet house chapters struck home and kept my attention.

yes, and how is that supposed to suit people with low attention spans?

>where Wardine be cry never stood a chance

God that's so fucking funny to me

>muh burroughs
>muh buildings
>muh neighbors
>muh folklore
>muh nostalgic longing for the days of muh youth when muh kneejerk anarchist ideology seemed more reasonable and muh villains were easier to hate

At least he writes about what he knows.

Some folks are dumb enough to try to write about what they don't.

>what is research
>what is imagination

the passage has its merits. But it's not really about whether or not it's good on its own. it doesn't have shit to do with the rest of the novel. There's more than one ebonics lmao chapter too with, again, nothing to do with the novel.

putting those in there really just shows how shallow DFW was and why IJ is only really admired because it's thick.

>implying you can convey the small ephemeral aspects of daily life lived within a culture through research and imagination alone

Kek.

Good luck.

>He's never read the Aubrey-Maturin series

exactly. there's no point to reading anything if it's just reading what other people imagine shit to be like. you can do the imagining yourself.

to be fair DFW did attend rehab but from what I can tell he just cribbed stories people said themselves, which is a kind of plagiarism and exploitation to be perfectly honest. especially considering his background.

Hahahahah. That is the best you can come up with?

And that example doesn't even work: he was an English writer who wrote about English sailors.

Why is it called Jerusalem if it's set in Northampton?

why can't you talk about it without reference to DFW

It's a reference to this, the idea that the sublime and eternal - Blake's holy city - can be found in mundane surroundings and ordinary people. "An opulent mythology for those without a pot to piss in", I think he put it. (Someone really needs to write a thesis on all the little links between Blake and Moore; he quotes from Jerusalem as early as V for Vendetta and paraphrases Marriage of Heaven and Hell in From Hell).

Thanks user, been planning to pick up Jerusalem for a while, it definitely sounds like my cup of tea. Which works by William Blake would you recommend I read before tackling Jerusalem?

Because plebs like you have to be dazzled with imagery and overly descriptive prose or else you lose interest.

Blake's style is GOAT. But I cant shake the feeling that if someone were to write poetry like that today, they would get laughed at.

no shit, they'd be 300+ years out of date

You can say the same of Shakespeare. Why?

No shit. I mention it because poetry today is half dead, the more prominent "poets" have no skill.

This is the same guy who wrote Providence and V for Vendetta?

He's an honest to god mongoloid.

This is the same guy who wrote From Hell

But Alan Moore is Cervantes compared to David Foster Wallace.

t. brainlet who doesn't uncerstand meter well enough to understand contemporary free verse

>You need to understand meter to read roopi kow
Spicy b8 fampai.

Rupi isn't a 'prominent poet' she's an instagram celebrity. Actually explore contemporary poetry for a few minutes.

poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/detail/92670

faggot

Alan Moore is Cervantes compared to Stephen King. He would bloom into a double-Cervantes compared to David Foster Wallace.

Nice "comedy" there bro

>ive never read Kane and dont understand contemporary arguments in determinism, therefore this is shit

just finished it. while not the biggest fan of moore, this is honestly a great book. not the GREAST IN THE PAST 20 YEARS, but significant enough to make me realize that contemporary literature can still be great and can still be innovative. it was a difficult read actually; in terms of length and scope, lots of characters, some difficult vocabulary. his prose is on the iffy side with me, but its not terrible or non-enjoyable, just kind of very mooreish.
Though i understand the lay out of the book and why chapters are where they are, I personally would shift a lot of stuff around. the book could have been about 200-300 words shorter and still made its point, but w/e it moore. as to the message and general themes of the book, well i disagree with moore a lot. especially his shitty baby boomer nihilism and general lack of hope for the future. he actually thinks the world will end by the mid 2030s. his underworld is very well constructed and its honestly a great challenge he took on to consolidate the two burroughs. i dont think thats necessarily how he looks at the world and afterlife but he certainly leans that way from what ive gathered from interviews and speeches. i did like that he left a lot of hope in the book, at least hope for characters to realize what they need in order to move on. generally i feel like his book is a success in terms of goal and result. i usually dont recommend books just because ive read them, and i do hate read a lot as well. but if someone has the time and can stomach to look up certain histories or have prior knowledge on the history of philosphy, poetry, england and physics/quantum physics, then i would deff recommend this book. also i should add, i think moore really thinks hes the new james joyce (in fact a lot of the novel mentions him, his daughter and a lot of his chappters are written in clear joycean prose. even a chapter written similarly to finnigans wake) but his innovation and contribution to literature is far from equal

>moore really thinks hes the new james joyce
That is certainly not the case. If anyone were to think they are the next Joyce, they would try very hard to innovate with the language, not openly pastiche Finnegan's Wake and fill their book with references to him.

I'm the next Joyce. My name's already James and that's gotta count for something.

>He would bloom into a double-Cervantes compared to David Foster Wallace.

I had a modest chuckle

But WHO WAS MICHAEL SUPPOSED TO KILL

said thinks not is. chill ur roll there fella

that was bugging me at the end, maybe the rapist or mandy. or maybe someone insignificant to the story. im really going to have to read it again. im sure crushing the chest and stuff is some kind of allegory it was mentioned twice believe.

okay but what book in the last 20 years tops this? okay it's not a competition but this is a competition thread

The Instructions