// you’re reading...

comics

Bits on literature

I read something today in which Christopher Hitchens was described as ’street’. Well, in context, more ’street’ than Richard Dawkins. It’s a funny old world I live in.

Elsewhere, Warren Ellis manages to provide me with as good a definition of ‘disingenuous’ as I’ve heard in ages. While calling for comics criticism to be written ‘with passion and in an informed manner‘, for writers who ‘contextualise what they were feeling about the work at hand, be it excitement or disappointment.’, I do believe that then describing a critic who does exactly that as ‘a writer how tortures language, like a man drying to dry a wet dog by frying it on the stove‘ is a pretty fair description of faux-naïvity. (link via Niall)

And in a related vein, Will Self appreciates Nick Cave in the Observer. Haven’t you got to love an article that contains the sentences:

‘..the great Manichean divide that rives the Cave worldview. Exposed also to his very individual and mythopoeic terrain: a landscape, present in his songs and his prose alike, wherein sex kicks up the dust, murders take place in the heat (of the moment) and the sins of the fathers are visited on everyone.

Manichean and mythopoeic. That Will Self. Another critic always torturing language. Anyone would think we want to be educated here, eh Warren..?

And via Baldur, the late Kurt Vonnegut’s rules for creative writing. Personally, number 7 is the key: Write to please just one person.

Right, back to Secret Projects.

Discussion

One comment for “Bits on literature”

  1. [...] That’s the reason I prefer John Clute as a critic to almost anyone else out there (and why I took issue with Warren Ellis’ dislike for complicated writing a few weeks ago), and it’s precisely [...]

    Posted by On Neotericity — other things Archive | July 31, 2007, 12:25 pm

Post a comment

Tagged

Archives