As experience teaches godwit, knowingly write bad is more fun than writing well (especially when "Good" means "unintentional harm"). Not having received news of trends that go in this direction, mixed up among the thousands of post-modern past, the attempt is to address this brilliant insight into a poetic defined - a movement pessimistic.
Unfortunately, agree on the guiding principles of pessimism not have agreed - in effect - even on the degree of seriousness of the intention is complicated, and speeches by voice chat or just remains. We have a wonderful incipit for Manifesto, it goes like this:
A new specter is haunting the planet Earth, and this is one of pessimism, or the new literary movement we are going to launch very soon.
In addition to this practically nothing. I am writing this post so as reminder of the major issues remained unresolved.
1. Vs mediocrity. caricatures
In short, the world is full of mediocre-bad texts. You'll also want to be lawyers of "everything is art" (and more broadly of "we can not judge"), but in fact a ranking is inevitable, again without bothering to develop a theory of aesthetic judgments, it is easier - for now - take for granted that the bad and there is discernable.
Now, the pessimism is proposed to "deconstruct" the inability to writing, studying the styles and reuse. A first major problem that arises in the process of revision is: we must strive to emulate to recreate a mediocrity "realistic", creating texts in which the parodic intent is indiscernible without knowing the intent of the authors, or should exacerbate the bad, using systematically, in a caricatured, its constructs?
The first approach has increased its science and the ability to produce more usable texts (a pessimist could write knowingly indistinguishable from the original pulp literature, an audience that might appreciate). Conversely, it has the defect of being over-intellectualism: a text between "bad" and a text "pessimistic" there would be formally difference, this would lie all the intention of the author, being made purely in the abstract. It really needs, in addition, increase the presence of mediocre literature in the world?
On the other hand, the second approach is more fun and were more likely to yield new and original art. However, establishing a style "closed" based on the use of constant bad , might lead to a writing so contrived as to be implausible, dark, unreadable and all ' invention of new styles that no one truly use (although this could be considered an honor and a possible further development). Another danger would be bordering on parody, the exasperation of the style of a single author or group of authors.
2. Presumption / We are our audience?
The movement may appear pessimistic from the beginning a movement obnoxious, composed of young people from their arrogance have dedicated themselves to ridicule what they consider inferior writers, without ever having demonstrated, before being able to write well " normally. " Moreover, support to write badly on purpose will not be a way to mask a latent inability effective? What
- personally - moves me is the willingness to play with language in an original way, with no particular claim, but the image problem exists.
issues concerning this: the pessimism is clearly an elitist movement, will not be too elitist? You will not need to be at least aspiring writers to enjoy a text pessimistic?
should, I think, try to have fun with the subtleties of style and fun instead on other floors.
On the other hand, in general, the pessimism has really make sense, or is it another sterile intellectual play that can never make anything interesting literature? (Perhaps the most significant question: D)
3. Formal and material
pessimism pessimism pessimist The plan must be limited to the stylistic and formal text or extend the content? What form and content will influence each other is inevitable, to some degree, but we must insist on this road for example by establishing (in the context of a narrative) through banal, full of holes, rambling, or write texts enjoyable beyond the form ?
The pessimist would then apply only to strictly artistic expressions of pessimism - the final product - and meanwhile develop a cooling-off "serious" parallel or even the poetic pessimist would be bad? The Manifesto of pessimism to be misspelled? This message that I'm writing, I should Starla writing bad? ( "You're doing )
4. New Horizons of pessimism
In opening the pessimistic guess I said that without wanting to explain the ugly. If on the other hand, hypothetically - not going to happen - the movement should have a serious development, stopping short of being the crap that has been so far, will sooner or later have to go to the root of the issue of bad .
Just to remember, in fact.
0 comments:
Post a Comment