NEWSFLASH! prominent perkygoth disavows existentialist literature!
Richard M. Romanowski
> (groan) so i was walking through the used bookstore recently,
> flipping through the new arrivals, and lo and behold, there
> sat a copy of sartre's _nausea_, the one major work of his
> i hadnt read those many years ago, and a work considered by
> some to be one of his finest. so i bought it, partially out
> of sheer nostalgia, admittedly, but mostly out of genuine
> interest.
>then the problems began.
>i beleive i was no more than two chapters into the book, when
> continuing reading it became simply unbearable. dry and dull.
> i simply could not go on. then it hit me. the idea that i
> can no longer give credence to that existentialist void.
The problem is, I think, that Sartre could not write his
way out of a wet paper bag.
Camus writes ten thousand times better. I don't
necessarily believe in Camus' ideas -- he was a goddamned
Communist, even if he *did* kill Nazis -- but I think he's
a lot of fun to read.
>so i stopped reading it. itll remain in my bookcase, a
> reminder of what once was, but i dont think ill ever take it
> out to read again.
I have a copy, too. Whenever I wonder if Sartre was
an idiot, I just glance through it and go, "Yup! He couldn't
find his Existential Void with both hands and a flashlight!"
Of course, someone should step in and say that _Nausea_
is merely a story of someone with 'bad faith' -- a story of someone
who hasn't seen the light, so to speak. I don't care. He still
can't write to save his life.
>anyone have some recommendations for good surrealist writings? :)
> do feel free to send some email if youve got any...
One very good piece is called _Strange_Landscapes_, about
being kidnapped as a boy and kept as a white slave. It's not
Joycean, but it does have something of the stream-of-consciousness
about its lot, if not its prose. The flashbacks are a bit
non-linear. I don't recall the author at present, but if you get
out all the books of that title and one of them has truly horrifying
rape scenes, that's the one. Anyone who can call prostitution a
victimless crime after reading is a 'certified dolt' as Albini
might say.
Stanislaw Lem has his weird moments. I don't know if I
would call him a surrealist. All surrealism is actually just
decadent occultism, or, in Austim Osman Spare's case, competent
occultism.
Would Roman Polanski's films qualify as surrealistic?
I haven't seen too many, but Poles have been active surrealists
lately, especially in visual arts.
>(i *loved* breton's _nadja_... and anything similar to cocteau's
> writings would be great too...)
Hmm. Joyce's _Ulysses_ would not qualify, according to
my definition of surrealism as decadent occultism -- if you want
to verify that definition, check out _Surrealism_and_the_Occult_,
Nadia Choucha. It primarily concerns visual surrealism.
LVX
Rick
[just trying to make everyone's surrealism more occult]
face iz white! eyes iz tired!
ah yes, the time has come. the inevitable has happenned.
many, many years ago, when i was a wee lad, and started in
on this goffick thing, i took great pleasure in the
reading of existentialist writings. i seem to remember
somehow identifying with them, like somehow someone had
written out my perspective on life, and published it, long
before i was even born. amazing, no?
well, as the years passed, i became disillusioned with the
entire concept of reading, as they always *made* you do it
in high school, and what they made you read was stuff youd
already read either independantly or in previous classes...
so i basically stopped reading as rabidly as i did in
elementary and junior high school...
but lately, ive been back on the reading kick, and i rather
like it - its like (excuse the poor choice of analogy about
to occur) picking up an old book you havent read in years.
(groan) so i was walking through the used bookstore recently,
flipping through the new arrivals, and lo and behold, there
sat a copy of sartre's _nausea_, the one major work of his
i hadnt read those many years ago, and a work considered by
some to be one of his finest. so i bought it, partially out
of sheer nostalgia, admittedly, but mostly out of genuine
interest.
then the problems began.
i beleive i was no more than two chapters into the book, when
continuing reading it became simply unbearable. dry and dull.
i simply could not go on. then it hit me. the idea that i
can no longer give credence to that existentialist void.
so i stopped reading it. itll remain in my bookcase, a
reminder of what once was, but i dont think ill ever take it
out to read again.
anyone have some recommendations for good surrealist writings? :)
do feel free to send some email if youve got any...
(i *loved* breton's _nadja_... and anything similar to cocteau's
writings would be great too...)
lurve and anti-despair,
-joel
--
joel metz wa...@ucscb.ucsc.edu
-=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=- -=oOo=-
"a truth told wiv bad intent beats all the lies that you invent" -- nik fiend
"and all good people lost in love should never lose their souls..." - sdc
-=oOo=- "they all call me crazee... ...but im free!" -=oOo=-
v v
Koenig Feurio
quotes Wake (whose face iz white and eyes iz tired, apparently):
>> (groan) so i was walking through the used bookstore recently,
>> flipping through the new arrivals, and lo and behold, there
>> sat a copy of sartre's _nausea_, the one major work of his
>> i hadnt read those many years ago, and a work considered by
>> some to be one of his finest. so i bought it, partially out
>> of sheer nostalgia, admittedly, but mostly out of genuine
>> interest.
>>then the problems began.
and then Richard responds:
> The problem is, I think, that Sartre could not write his
>way out of a wet paper bag.
> Camus writes ten thousand times better. I don't
>necessarily believe in Camus' ideas -- he was a goddamned
>Communist, even if he *did* kill Nazis -- but I think he's
>a lot of fun to read.
Perhaps you don't remember your history too well, but Communists and
Nazis did a good deal of killing each other during World War II. They
were, after all, fighting a war against each other (or at least the
second half of a war). When the Soviets liberated Poland and then
Germany, they killed hundreds, maybe thousands, of Nazi politicians,
SS, and other prominent Nazi prisoners of war.
Not that the Soviets were really Communists. But that's another
argument, which I'll save for my grandmother, who thinks that Stalin
was a true Communist, although later leaders did sell out the
revolution.
--
___________ ______________________________________________________________
/ payn@ \ "Let an artist show you how to bring a curse down on Satan" \
/ scf.usc.edu / --Hilt /
\____________/_____________________________________________________________/
Richard M. Romanowski
pa...@phakt.usc.edu (Koenig Feurio) writes:
>Richard M. Romanowski (who I seem to be quoting more than usual today)
>quotes Wake (whose face iz white and eyes iz tired, apparently):
>>> (groan) so i was walking through the used bookstore recently,
>>> flipping through the new arrivals, and lo and behold, there
>>> sat a copy of sartre's _nausea_, the one major work of his
>>> i hadnt read those many years ago, and a work considered by
>>> some to be one of his finest. so i bought it, partially out
>>> of sheer nostalgia, admittedly, but mostly out of genuine
>>> interest.
>>>then the problems began.
>and then Richard responds:
>> The problem is, I think, that Sartre could not write his
>>way out of a wet paper bag.
>> Camus writes ten thousand times better. I don't
>>necessarily believe in Camus' ideas -- he was a goddamned
>>Communist, even if he *did* kill Nazis -- but I think he's
>>a lot of fun to read.
>Perhaps you don't remember your history too well, but Communists and
>Nazis did a good deal of killing each other during World War II.
Camus was not on the Russian side.
They
>were, after all, fighting a war against each other (or at least the
>second half of a war). When the Soviets liberated Poland and then
>Germany, they killed hundreds, maybe thousands, of Nazi politicians,
>SS, and other prominent Nazi prisoners of war.
>Not that the Soviets were really Communists.
That's the thing -- Camus really *was* a Communist --
brotherhood of man, rationality overcoming animal instinct, all
that idealistic rot that allows small-scale communes to work
and fails miserably in large-scale implementation.
_Between_Hell_and_Reason_, a collection of Camus' writings
for a Resistance newspaper, is worth perusal.
LVX
Rick
The Lost One
: Camus writes ten thousand times better. I don't
Hmm...Just out of curiosity, were you guys reading Camus and Sartre in the
original French or in lame English translations?
Okay, granted, it's not fair of me to categorize this way, but I really
have to say I prefer the original texts of things to their
translations...Something tends to get lost in the shift of languages...
Anyway, Carry on Screaming...
*Narcissus*
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
This is the first of my last days. I built it up; now I take it apart;
Climbed up real high; now fall down real far.
No need for me to stay; the last thing left, I just threw it away.
I put my faith in God and my trust in you;
Now, there's nothing more fucked-up I could do.
I'm the one without a soul; I'm the one with this big fucking hole.
No new tale to tell--Twenty-six years on my way to Hell.
Gotta listen to your big time hard line bad luck fist fuck.
Don't think you're having all the fun; you know me: I hate everyone.
Wish there was something real; wish there was something true.
Wish there was something real in this world full of you.
I want to, but I can't turn back...But I want to.
Scott_Edwar...@cup.portal.com
"The Magnetic Fields" by Andre Breton and Philippe Soupault
"Story of the Eye" by George Bataille
Salvidor Dali's Autobiography is pretty wild also.