# Choke by Chuck Palahniuk



## strangedaze (Jul 7, 2006)

so im reading _*Choke*_, by Chuck Palahniuk of _*Fight Club*_ fame, and i am always struck by how much his writing reminds me of a seven year old with downs syndrome. im willing to give _*Fight Club*_ its due - i enjoyed it, the style didnt annoy the fuck out of me, and it has characters who rise above chucks usual parade of annoying cardboard cutouts. but then i read _*Diary*_ and i thought, fuck, this is brutal. it couldnt get much worse. could it? oh yes, it could. _*Choke*_ is such a poorly written book, on so many fucking levels. exampe:

_     "This one's pretty," the Mommy said, looking at the picture of a woman smiling on the box. She switched the bottle inside with another bottle. All the bottles the same dark brown glass.
    Opening another box, she said, "Do you think she's pretty?"
    And the kid's so stupid he says, "Who?"
    "You know who," the Mommy said. "She's young, too. I just saw the two of you looking at clothes. You were holding her hand, so don't lie."
    And the kid was so stupid he didn't know to just run away._

what. the. fuck. first, can someone tell me why the tense breaks down halfway through this linguistic clusterfuck? second, the 'Mommy'? the 'kid'? are you kidding me? third, how can anyone capable of SPELLING THEIR OWN FUCKING NAME get away with a sentence like, 'And the kid was so stupid he didn't know to just run away'? in a PUBLISHED NOVEL? maybe if chuck was doing a vernacular thing, but no. i think hes just that bad.

my gripes with this piece of shit go on and on. i have no idea whats going on or why we are being told useless facts that dont relate to anything. if i wanted to read a compendium of obscure and bizarre factoids, id fucking well buy one. or use google. maybe instead of trying to wow me with his vast knowledge of crap, chuck should focus on giving me characters that i can envision as real people, and not two-dimensional lemmings. im forcing myself to read the rest of _*Choke*_, just so i can have more credibility when i bash it. 

maybe im being a bit harsh on chuck. maybe. there are things i like about his novels. one - they are imaginative and usually pretty depraved. he writes about things that i enjoy, and he has really brought a lot of male readers back to wide world of literacy. the downside to that is that whenever i read anything hes written, my inner child hangs itself because it so desperately wants someone with any technical comepetency to tackle his subject matter. its like once someone writes about them, theyre lost forever. and its a shame that it has to be chuck flushing them. 

well, at least one good thing could be said about _*Choke*_: it is aptly titled. 




EDIT

i found a review at ruthlessreviews.com that sums up a lot of what i was too spiteful to articulate about *Choke*, especially this section:

_Choke is no different. It starts out with hints at the novel's ending, just like Fight Club. It has a lot of references to things that are not common knowledge, just like Fight Club (but less interesting- Fight Club's arcane knowledge was explosives, whereas Choke's arcana deals with security codes in shopping centers and hospitals). The sociopathic main character finds out that he might not be who he thinks he is, just like Fight Club. He has a sidekick that seems to know all the unorthodox answers to life's riddles, just like Fight Club. By the way, this paragraph could easily have been written about Survivor or Invisible Monsters._

you can find the full review here: http://ruthlessreviews.com/reviews.cfm/id/200/page/choke.html


----------



## ms. vodka (Jul 7, 2006)

i never know quite how to feel when i discover someone's writing is pure shit.  i'm like... is it pure shit or is it me?  i encountered this most recently when reading the book of kerouac's 'prosedy'.  it fucking sucks.  it's disjointed and abstract and lame and boring.  then i was like... well... maybe it's just me... maybe i just don't understand it yet... 

that's why i'm glad to find this... although i haven't read the book so i can't agree or disagree... i'm glad it's not just me who stumbles across things and says wtf... this is just... lame.

kisses,
jen


----------



## Avarice (Jul 7, 2006)

this is why I like mr. daze.

I've been reading the ebook of Choke and am reading bits of fight club and yes its very unique and fits the time of how men feel, but I agree, I love his ideas, very original but his minimalist style really kills me after a while. one chapter at a time is ok for me but he cant write dialogue and his whole novel is just depressing outlook with limited humour to keep the reader from hanging themselves.

I'm in awe of his massive fan base though, especially online, the lucky bastard, so at least he knows how to move a book, but I dont think he beats Ellis or Thompson or Copeland.

Pity he wouldnt get some one else to write out his ideas.


----------



## gigi (Jul 7, 2006)

assboy,

tell it like it is, kool thing...  i'm surprised there has been no opposition to you!  lol

and jen, that Kerouac was a major WTF moment for me, too.  

"dododododededelalalalala" does not a verse make.


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 7, 2006)

im waiting for the die-hard fans to lynch me 

jennnnn - shhh, dont tell lans, but im finding it super difficult to get into on the road. shh.

avarice - i actually frequent chucks website. lots of great stuff there. i think the cult website is genius. pure and simple. thanks for stopping by!

lans - im waiting for the backlash. waiting...waiting...


----------



## mwd (Jul 7, 2006)

I agree with most of the stuff in your review, but it's odd because I still enjoyed reading the book.  Even if his writing was a bit of a clusterfuck, I still enjoyed the book despite that, because it's got some pretty original stuff in it, and it made me think about his themes in ways that I hadn't before.



			
				strangedaze said:
			
		

> the downside to that is that whenever i read anything hes written, my inner child hangs itself because it so desperately wants someone with any technical comepetency to tackle his subject matter. its like once someone writes about them, theyre lost forever. and its a shame that it has to be chuck flushing them.


Haha, well said.  I wonder how his books would change if it was a different writer tackling the subject matter, because that's really the strength of his stuff, is the subject matter/themes he addresses.  Maybe he should write essays, instead of novels.  Hmm.

Avarice, you should read some Amy Hempel (who Palahniuk lists as an influence).  She's very good... of the stories of hers that I've read, my favourite one was "In the Cemetary where Al Jolson is Buried" (which left me in shivers by the end).  I found this story of hers http://www.pifmagazine.com/SID/413/ online, which is also pretty good.  She's a minimalist writer as well, but her style is vastly different than Palahniuk's ... not liking Palahniuk's writing isn't the same as not liking minimalism in general.


----------



## ms. vodka (Jul 7, 2006)

I haven't read On The Road since I was like... seventeen.  I was considering that yesterday and thinking it may be time for a re-read.


----------



## Avarice (Jul 7, 2006)

what exactly is his cult site? like what makes it so special? I wish ellis wud update his...


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 8, 2006)

its just chuckpalahniuk.net. it has a lot of information about similar writers and has a workshop section. lots of other authors frequent it, too.


----------



## Fantasy of You (Jul 8, 2006)

strangedaze- in all due respect, if any is due at all, you need to shut the fuck up. 

If you are too narrow minded and cannot appreciate something for it's unique style then do not bitch about it. Chuck has a style different from any other author I have ever written- and i respect him for it.  I have read Fight Club and Choke and they are shocking similar- to praise one because you are interested in the plot and call the other one shit because you are not interested in the plot, even though the style and structure are almost identical is shockingly retarded.

If you had the courage to write outside the box like  Chuck, or even the skill to write at half his level, perhaps I would take what you have to say more seriously- especialy when you see breaks in tense where none exists. 

If you don't like his style, don't read his books, and don't bitch with insane exaggeration about him. 

I personally loved every book he wrote, because the style appealed greatly to me. 

strangdaze, in short, I have gone from not knowing who you are, to knowing how much of an idiot a person can be. 

You don't understand him- so don't pretend to while you take the piss out of him. Dick...


----------



## Avarice (Jul 8, 2006)

lol here you go daze, the die hards are coming...

Fantasy, chuck uses minimalist style... many writers use that, some one further up even gave an example of one....

Chuck isnt the most skilled writer, I've never heard any one say he is, but they, and I do all agree his plots are interesting...


Dont say daze is exaggerating when you're acting like Chuck has the skill of Stephen King.

Whats there to understand? He writers minimalist style nihilist books that highlight how empty people are feeling in this day and age, daze didnt say " y'all suck coz y'all like de bad man, mr palanuk!"

And, "dick"? now name calling is just childish.... even for an angry dyslexic child like you.

If you're 16 you could try acting it, time can only do so much for you, baby.


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 9, 2006)

Fantasy of You said:
			
		

> strangedaze- in all due respect, if any is due at all, you need to shut the fuck up.



lol youre the boss!


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 9, 2006)

Avarice said:
			
		

> lol here you go daze, the die hards are coming...



thats okay. its just the internet, after all.


----------



## Fantasy of You (Jul 9, 2006)

Avarice- what do you mean I'm acting like he has the skill of Steven  King. I didn't like anything I have read from SK, but I have enjoyed reading  Chuck's stuff, therefor I think he is the better writer. Your preference doesn't determine the skill of any writer. 

Name calling is childish?  I'm glad you pointed that out, it was the exact reason I did- to prove a point. Name calling is childish, but you seem to accept it from strangedaze just because you agree with what he is saying. 

And don't say name calling is childish, and then call me lol, at least keep constant when you talk crap.


----------



## Avarice (Jul 9, 2006)

how could you not appreciate the shining or misery? Thats impossible, they have the same dark themes of dispair that palahniuk could only dream of creating.


----------



## Fantasy of You (Jul 9, 2006)

Lol, to be honest, Shining was ruined by the Simpsons spoof of it... but I simply don't like SK style, or the fact he sold his soul to commercial profit..

I don't like them, but I'm not going to slate his books and style and cuss him for daring to do what he loves, am I? So I don't think daze should either...


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 9, 2006)

Fantasy of You said:
			
		

> I don't like them, but I'm not going to slate his books and style and cuss him for daring to do what he loves, am I? So I don't think daze should either...



but you sure were quick to cuss me for daring to have an opinion contrary to yours, werent you sunshine? 

as for your intense angst over my dismissal of the novel. if i dont like a book, im going to say i dont like it. and since this is area is called 'Book Reviews', not 'Lets Hold Hands and Pray That Chuck Lets Us Hold His Wee-Wee While He Pees', i think i have every right to. 

i reviewed the book honestly, the way i saw it. you're free to do the same. and while youre at it, call me a dick again. its endearing , in a queerish kind of way.


----------



## ms. vodka (Jul 9, 2006)

well, drew... i think a thread title change is in order.  i suggest you pm a mod. 

fantasy of you... please refrain from making this personal.  strangedaze does have every right to post his opinion in regard to the book in question... if you'd like to argue that opinion that's fine, but please do so without personally insulting other members of the forum.

whoa doggies, let's rope this one back in and bring it back on topic.  yee-haw!

vodka


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 9, 2006)

jen to the rescue. and ive already petitioned to have the thread title changed to:

'strangedaze should be strung up like a side of veal'

has a nice ring to it, yeah?


----------



## IamLegend (Jul 12, 2006)

Fantasy of You said:
			
		

> strangedaze- in all due respect, if any is due at all, you need to shut the fuck up.
> 
> If you are too narrow minded and cannot appreciate something for it's unique style then do not bitch about it. Chuck has a style different from any other author I have ever written- and i respect him for it.  I have read Fight Club and Choke and they are shocking similar- to praise one because you are interested in the plot and call the other one shit because you are not interested in the plot, even though the style and structure are almost identical is shockingly retarded.
> 
> ...



Tone down the naivete and ignorance my friend. Palahniuk, haha. He's highly overated, and that's being nice. He's developed a cult following mostly due to the work of David Fincher and Jim Uhls. Check out the Fight Club book sales before the movie came out, and see how they escalated as a result (although the movie didn't do too well in the box office either). Oh and I suppose you "understand him". What are you, his husband? Jesus, he's not some tortured genius that everyone picks on and nobody appreciates, he's an average writer with a very tedious writing style that does a lot of research, most of which is random and looks like it took a lot of effort to fit into what kinds of make shift plots he comes up with. Don't get me wrong, I read Fight Club; hell I even own Survivor (I believe this is is best work, but that isn't saying much) and have read Choke, Haunted and am reading Diary right now. Yes that sounds contradictory, but I've gotten in the habit of picking up an author and reading everything by him regardless if I enjoy it or not. 

I guess what I'm getting at is that calling someone a dick because they disagree with you is blatently ignorant, and frankly just a flat out dick move. Try and take in some different opinions, it may do you some good. Oh and, I hope you know you did exactly what strangedaze predicted would happen about the Palahniuk die hards coming out in arms.


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 12, 2006)

zing!


----------



## A_MacLaren (Jul 12, 2006)

> and since this is area is called 'Book Reviews', not 'Lets Hold Hands and Pray That Chuck Lets Us Hold His Wee-Wee While He Pees', i think i have every right to.



I think Chuck already has a guy for that.


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 13, 2006)

ha. nice work. ps are you maclaren from lit.org?


----------



## A_MacLaren (Jul 13, 2006)

You know it. Haven't been there for a while, though.


----------



## strangedaze (Jul 13, 2006)

me neither. too much drama and not enough feedback.


----------



## johnsonguy (Jun 9, 2007)

hmm


----------



## Girl in Story (Jul 4, 2007)

Everyone here keeps reiterating that the area is called "Book Reviews," but most of you aren't even posting your comments on the books. You're insulting the author on a personal and kind of disgustings level, when (and I'm going out on a limb here) I'm going to guess that none of you are actually aquainted with him.

This thread is for people to post their opinions on, and everyone should have the right to say whether or not they personally like the book Choke, and why, but you shouldn't base an author's merit on whether or not they're "overrated," because that's basically saying that they're a bad writer because people like their work. 

Also, Palahniuk himself has said that all of his books are about lonely people trying to connect with others. He has said that there's a singular theme present in all of his novels, but that doesn't make his actual stories the same. 

Let's see. Choke is about a Christ figure trying to convince himself he isn't a good person, so that he has no expectations to live up to. Fight club is about an antidisestablishment fighting club based around the idea that if self improvment doesn't work, we should try self destruction. 

You're right. They're exactly the same. Silly me. 

You might also notice that I didn't have to start cussing to express my point of view. I simply used an excess of sarcasm.

Lastly, someone doesn't have to be a "diehard fan" to have an opinion different than your own.


----------



## Crazy_dude6662 (Jul 5, 2007)

Girl in Story said:
			
		

> Also, Palahniuk himself has said that all of his books are about lonely people trying to connect with others. He has said that there's a singular theme present in all of his novels




im confused...how is a story about kid masturbating at a bottom of a pool and then getting his intestines ripped out by the filter pump and his sister getting pregnant with his sperm that was in the water create a story about lonely people trying to cnnect with others?

just curious


----------



## Dan (Jul 5, 2007)

Fantasy of You said:
			
		

> strangedaze- in all due respect, if any is due at all, you need to shut the fuck up.
> 
> If you are too narrow minded and cannot appreciate something for it's unique style then do not bitch about it. Chuck has a style different from any other author I have ever written- and i respect him for it.  I have read Fight Club and Choke and they are shocking similar- to praise one because you are interested in the plot and call the other one shit because you are not interested in the plot, even though the style and structure are almost identical is shockingly retarded.
> 
> ...


That was mature.

I hate to break it to you, but Palahniuk doesn't write particularly well, and he certainly isn't doing anything new.  You like him, good for you, but there's no need for personal attacks.


----------



## Dan (Jul 5, 2007)

Crazy_dude6662 said:
			
		

> im confused...how is a story about kid masturbating at a bottom of a pool and then getting his intestines ripped out by the filter pump and his sister getting pregnant with his sperm that was in the water create a story about lonely people trying to cnnect with others?
> 
> just curious



Oddly enough, I stopped reading "Haunted" after that chapter.  That's only the third book in my life that I didn't finish.


----------



## Crazy_dude6662 (Jul 5, 2007)

i have only read that story out of all his works. 
i read it online somewhere. it didnt impress me or gross me out. it is pretty much impossible for all of what he wrote to happen and it made it far less scary or horrifying.


----------



## Truth-Teller (Jul 5, 2007)

Crazy_dude6662 said:
			
		

> im confused...how is a story about kid masturbating at a bottom of a pool and then getting his intestines ripped out by the filter pump and his sister getting pregnant with his sperm that was in the water create a story about lonely people trying to cnnect with others?
> 
> just curious


 
LMFAO.
Now, I just have to read this book for the hilarity. :joker:


----------



## Girl in Story (Jul 5, 2007)

Okay, Crazy_dude6662 that was both totally funny and a good point. Plus, thanks for not cussing me out.

I started reading that story at work (I work at a bookstore) but then I had to sell our last copy of Haunted, so I don't know. Maybe it isn't about people trying to connect with eachother. Maybe he went a different direction with that story. 

I pretty much agree with you. I really didn't like that story at all. I also didn't like Lullaby very much. But I loved Invisible Monsters and Survivor. 

And, Dan, you can't really break it to anyone that an author sucks. Whether or not an author sucks is a matter of opinion to the individual. But I agree about the personal attacks.


----------



## Dan (Jul 5, 2007)

Girl in Story said:
			
		

> And, Dan, you can't really break it to anyone that an author sucks. Whether or not an author sucks is a matter of opinion to the individual. But I agree about the personal attacks.


I didn't say he sucks, though, personally, I think he does.  I said he doesn't write particularly well, and you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who says that he does write well.  I also said that he's not doing anything new, and that's just fact.  That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Crazy_dude6662 (Jul 5, 2007)

i dont particularly like his work. from my experience it seems like he's trying to use as much gross out things as possible to attract readers.


----------



## Girl in Story (Jul 5, 2007)

Okay, that's cool that you don't like his writing, I'm obviously not going to argue with that. 

But just out of curiousity, do you think it's really possible to write anything completely innovative these days? With all the things written before us?


----------



## Crazy_dude6662 (Jul 5, 2007)

yes and no.
you can come up with an innovative idea but most likely you will end up using already used ideas at some stage.


----------



## Girl in Story (Jul 5, 2007)

I agree. I think it's pretty much impossible not to. There's some famous guy (who of course, I've forgotten) who once said that, "Great art is knowing who to steal from." 

Obviously, you shouldn't actually steal someone's ideas, but you should incorporate small parts of ideas from various previous works into your own, because really, that's all you _can_ do.


----------



## Dan (Jul 5, 2007)

Girl in Story said:
			
		

> Okay, that's cool that you don't like his writing, I'm obviously not going to argue with that.
> 
> But just out of curiousity, do you think it's really possible to write anything completely innovative these days? With all the things written before us?


Girl, I was merely responding to these two points by Fantasy:

*"If you are too narrow minded and cannot appreciate something for it's unique style then do not bitch about it. Chuck has a style different from any other author I have ever written- and i respect him for it."

If you had the courage to write outside the box like  Chuck, or even the skill to write at half his level..."

*I mean, come on.

But to answer your question, I don't think it's possible to tell a truly original story.  I think the good writers blend original elements with their own, hopefully literate, style.  Palahniuk writes like an angry high-school Emo kid.


----------



## Truth-Teller (Jul 5, 2007)

LMFAO.

I agree, oh, I agree. Horrid writer.


----------



## Girl in Story (Jul 5, 2007)

Eh, well, like I said. To each his own. I disagree, but I've voiced my opinion (probably too much, I know I can be pretty irritating, but I blame an excess of coffee) and this thread is making my head hurt a little. 

Actually, maybe that's the coffee...

Whatever.


----------



## Dan (Jul 5, 2007)

Girl in Story said:
			
		

> Eh, well, like I said. To each his own. I disagree, but I've voiced my opinion (probably too much, I know I can be pretty irritating, but I blame an excess of coffee) and this thread is making my head hurt a little.
> 
> Actually, maybe that's the coffee...
> 
> Whatever.


Coffee don't cause headaches...it cures 'em.


----------



## Girl in Story (Jul 5, 2007)

I believe it depends on the type of headache, and whether or not the blood vessels in the brain are dilated. But you're probably right. It's probably this thread.


----------



## Dan (Jul 5, 2007)

Girl in Story said:
			
		

> I believe it depends on the type of headache, and whether or not the blood vessels in the brain are dilated. But you're probably right. It's probably this thread.



I have that effect on people.  My bad.


----------



## raymondstary (Jul 7, 2007)

next post, please.


----------



## raymondstary (Jul 7, 2007)

I read Haunted. There were moments. The entire book was worth reading a single short story hidden near the end because it had the feel of a decent Vonnegut story. I recommend going to a bookstore with a coffee shop in it, taking the book down there and reading that one story. I can't recall the name.


----------



## Truth-Teller (Jul 7, 2007)

This guy really must suck at writing.

Hhahahha!!


----------



## raymondstary (Jul 9, 2007)

Fantasy of You said:


> strangedaze- in all due respect, if any is due at all, you need to shut the fuck up.


Strong opening. It keeps to the spirit of simplicity and scattershot, adolescent rage.



> If you are too narrow minded and cannot appreciate something for it's unique style then do not bitch about it. Chuck has a style different from any other author I have ever written- and i respect him for it. I have read Fight Club and Choke and they are shocking similar- to praise one because you are interested in the plot and call the other one shit because you are not interested in the plot, even though the style and structure are almost identical is shockingly retarded.


I think the first sentence is intended as a sort of argument. The if/then construction (eg: if there is not an IQ requirement for computer ownership and internet access, then we will get sentences like: "If you are too narrow minded...")
This is coming from the person who has written Chuck, so he's going to know things we aren't privy too, having merely read him.
We learn something about fantasy here, and that something is that fantasy is easily shocked. Twice in this paragraph alone, he is shocked.
I am stunned.




> If you had the courage to write outside the box like Chuck, or even the skill to write at half his level, perhaps I would take what you have to say more seriously- especialy when you see breaks in tense where none exists.
> 
> If you don't like his style, don't read his books, and don't bitch with insane exaggeration about him.
> 
> ...


I have to believe the bad writing is intentional and I have become the victim of a clever comedian.
We all know Chuck writes in a box. This man is clearly a charlatan and he has tried to pull the wool over our eyes. He has not written Chuck Pahalhshjfnuikukukiik at all.
I would imagine the only appropriate response to this to be: "We live in a free country!" shouted at rock concert conversation levels. Or perhaps: "Make me shut up, you mascara wearing vampire poseur!"




> You don't understand him- so don't pretend to while you take the piss out of him. Dick...


Is this some bad translation of an Eastern European idiom?


----------



## wmd (Jul 9, 2007)

And to think that I almost bought "Choke" while at the bookstore today. 

Maybe I will read it in the library some day instead.


----------



## Amour (Jul 9, 2007)

Crazy_dude6662 said:


> im confused...how is a story about kid masturbating at a bottom of a pool and then getting his intestines ripped out by the filter pump and his sister getting pregnant with his sperm that was in the water create a story about lonely people trying to cnnect with others?
> 
> just curious



That honestly made me sick. Not physically, not "grossed out", but simply disgusted. Haven't read a word of Chuck's since, and I daresay, I feel no palpable loss.


----------



## Kyle R (Jul 10, 2007)

I find all this Palahniuk-bashing uncalled for. Sure, you can dislike someone`s writing, but is it really necessary to insult the writer?

Keep in mind Chuck has made the New York Times Bestseller list on more than one occassion. have you? Could you? If so, prove it. Publish a novel, make the NYT BS list, and we`ll talk about it here.

I have no qualms here.. some of Chuck`s work has disappointed me.. some of it inspired me.. But in every case I still respect him because he puts in the effort to make it a career out of being a writer. 

You may not like the prose, but at least show some respect to a fellow writer. 

And yes, in haunted, as Chuck said himself, he was deliberately trying to disgust people.


----------



## raymondstary (Jul 11, 2007)

KyleColorado said:


> Keep in mind Chuck has made the New York Times Bestseller list on more than one occassion. have you? Could you? If so, prove it. Publish a novel, make the NYT BS list, and we`ll talk about it here.


This is somehow relevant to quality? Does this place the author into some unassailable position of indisputable greatness? I doubt I'll make the best seller list, if I even ever manage to complete a novel, how to book or something as deep and meaningful as "The Secret" (The secret? How to make millions off people who think certain ways of thinking will prevent bad things from happening to you. Drunk drivers will miraculously swerve back onto their side of the road, muggers will say: "Gee that guy is a positive thinker. I'll go mug that guy with the mullet, confederate flag T-shirt and semi-concealed handgun and buttcrack.")

Best seller or not, one puts one's work into the public eye, one should expect, and be immune to, hateful criticisms.


----------



## Crazy_dude6662 (Jul 11, 2007)

Amour said:


> That honestly made me sick. Not physically, not "grossed out", but simply disgusted. Haven't read a word of Chuck's since, and I daresay, I feel no palpable loss.



i didnt find it sick or gross or disgusting, but that was probably because it was unbeleivable. if it was alot more beleivable i might have been grossed out.


----------



## Dan (Jul 11, 2007)

Amour said:


> That honestly made me sick. Not physically, not "grossed out", but simply disgusted. Haven't read a word of Chuck's since, and I daresay, I feel no palpable loss.



Don't forget how he chewed through his own intestines!!!


----------



## Kyle R (Jul 11, 2007)

raymondstary said:
			
		

> This is somehow relevant to quality?


Yes, I believe so. While Chuck's minimalistic, nihilistic prose may not be to the liking of some, the quality in his writing lies in his spiralling plots and unexpected twists that engage the reader. Prose vs. plot, a whole new discussion altogether.. I can name other successful authors whose prose I dislike, but whose stories engage (one that comes to mind is the drab narration of Michael Crichton). 



			
				raymondstary said:
			
		

> Does this place the author into some unassailable position of indisputable greatness?


Why feel the need to assail a writer at all? Art is subjective. I think most of Picasso's work is bad. If I wanted to assail him, I'd say he paints like an autistic cripple. But he stuck with it and made a success of himself doing so, so for that I respect him and his work. I may not like it, but I don't bash it, because what position am I in to do so?



			
				raymondstary said:
			
		

> I doubt I'll make the best seller list, if I even ever manage to complete a novel


A good point. It's easy to critique something, even when it could take us ten years and we might still not be able to write a novel worth reading, let alone selling. Partly skill, partly intellilgence (in terms of knowing how to pursue a subject of marketability), and partly diligence, devotion, and hard work. 
So, it seems absurd to me to insult the craft of an established author. Critique and discuss its relative merits, sure.. but to flat out mock the craft of someone who has successfully produced something that you cannot seems ludicrous.


----------



## raymondstary (Jul 11, 2007)

KyleColorado said:


> Yes, I believe so. While Chuck's minimalistic, nihilistic prose may not be to the liking of some, the quality in his writing lies in his spiralling plots and unexpected twists that engage the reader. Prose vs. plot, a whole new discussion altogether.. I can name other successful authors whose prose I dislike, but whose stories engage (one that comes to mind is the drab narration of Michael Crichton).


I'm reading "Next." 
Some parts of C.'s book were quite good. He's not a genius, though. Nothing surprised me. I kept thinking of the movie Saw. Gory, bizarre, sometimes funny. Intentionally jaded.



> Why feel the need to assail a writer at all? Art is subjective. I think most of Picasso's work is bad. If I wanted to assail him, I'd say he paints like an autistic cripple. But he stuck with it and made a success of himself doing so, so for that I respect him and his work. I may not like it, but I don't bash it, because what position am I in to do so?


Because it's fun. And because it's true. Those are just two reasons. Upsetting people is yet another. Perception is subjective, quality itself is not, though it's quite impossible to get out of the subjective realm, seeing as we're mere humans. Were there no real beauty, the word wouldn't exist. I think, therefore I am quite capable of bashing. I am in a position to do so, and that position is sitting, standing, lying down... If someone puts it out there, then they might get it shot off.

[quot]
A good point. It's easy to critique something, even when it could take us ten years and we might still not be able to write a novel worth reading, let alone selling. Partly skill, partly intellilgence (in terms of knowing how to pursue a subject of marketability), and partly diligence, devotion, and hard work. 
So, it seems absurd to me to insult the craft of an established author. Critique and discuss its relative merits, sure.. but to flat out mock the craft of someone who has successfully produced something that you cannot seems ludicrous.[/quote] I think being the madman in the square has a romantic appeal. I also think the madman gets to have better sex than the rest of the crowd milling by him.


----------

