Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Gets Kept

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 85 posts

Re: What Gets Kept

#51

Post by [deleted] »

bsenftner wrote: post #38
huhkerrf wrote: post #7

Maybe it's because I never had my On the Road phase, but this review on Kerouac I always found really strong: > On the Road is a terrible book about terrible people. Jack Kerouac and his terrible friends drive across the US about seven zillion times for no particular reason, getting in car accidents and stealing stuff and screwing women whom they promise to marry and then don’t. > Jack Kerouac’s relationship with Dea…

Around the same time I first read On The Road, my wiser than should be possible mother said "Oh, you need to read this too" and it was "Off the Road: Twenty Years with Cassady, Kerouac and Ginsberg", written by Carolyn Cassady. Rips the band aid right off of those sexist abuser of innocents, those utter assholes. They write great literature, and the fact that they expose their own terrible ethics bare, but surrounded…

[deleted]

Re: What Gets Kept

#52

Post by everdrive »

doginasuit wrote: post #46
huhkerrf wrote: post #7

Maybe it's because I never had my On the Road phase, but this review on Kerouac I always found really strong: > On the Road is a terrible book about terrible people. Jack Kerouac and his terrible friends drive across the US about seven zillion times for no particular reason, getting in car accidents and stealing stuff and screwing women whom they promise to marry and then don’t. > Jack Kerouac’s relationship with Dea…

I'm curious, do the people who love the book generally believe that the characters in the story are admirable? I remember a certain sick feeling, the same you get with any story that pulls you along to places you aren't sure you want to go. But at the same time I could relate to the "anything but this" spirit it held toward the culture at the time. I appreciated the mood and the restlessness of it, like watching the…

I'm not very familiar with Kerouac, but I've at least heard people talk about it. It was far less impactful, but reading the Scott Alexander review, the very first thing that comes to mind is SLC Punk! Of course SLC Punk! makes its message pretty explicit, and by the end the main character learns that living so hedonistically was always selfish / immature / destructive / etc.

When I was a kid, I was very sad for the last half of SLC Punk! Like so many stupid kids, I was sure that I was oppressed and my angry instincts had some sort of real defiance and valor to them. And of course, just like the movie, a bit of life experience and maturity revealed the lie. I rewatched the movie recently as an adult (~late 30s) it was a totally different experience. The end of the movie felt a bit like a mercy. (which I'm sure is what the director intended)

I say this only because I've never heard people talk about Kerouac in this way, but I also think the last time I heard anyone talk about Kerouac was back in college; back when we could still lie to ourselves about the nature of (stupid, teenage) rebellion. Back when we had no inkling just how selfish or privileged we were.

Re: What Gets Kept

#53

Post by thelarrys »

cassepipe wrote: post #43
thelarrys wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deep pockmarks in Scott Alexander's hands left from so strongly clutching his pearls will take an eternity to de-dimple.

TIL I learned that not liking a-holes and to find the story their repititive adventures boring is pearl-clutching

no, just expressing outrage over the characters' values in a On the Road is. Judging some beat literature as if it had promised sober insight, ethical maturity, and durable philosophical yield is like taking a classic of rock music (e.g. Bohemian Rhapsody) and saying "this makes no fucking sense, its flamboyant garbage, no structural rigor whatsoever - go listen to beethoven."

if you read on the road thiking you're going to get carefully distilled philosophical and moral clarity, you're in the wrong Wendy's sir.

Re: What Gets Kept

#54

Post by kamranjon »

huhkerrf wrote: post #7

Maybe it's because I never had my On the Road phase, but this review on Kerouac I always found really strong: > On the Road is a terrible book about terrible people. Jack Kerouac and his terrible friends drive across the US about seven zillion times for no particular reason, getting in car accidents and stealing stuff and screwing women whom they promise to marry and then don’t. > Jack Kerouac’s relationship with Dea…

I interestingly came to a pretty similar conclusion about Kerouac around the same time as this reviewer, and brought it up in my review of Henry Miller’s book on Big Sur (which I can highly recommend): https://kamranjon.com/writings/henry-miller-and-the-big-sur....

Re: What Gets Kept

#55

Post by doginasuit »

everdrive wrote: post #52
doginasuit wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, do the people who love the book generally believe that the characters in the story are admirable? I remember a certain sick feeling, the same you get with any story that pulls you along to places you aren't sure you want to go. But at the same time I could relate to the "anything but this" spirit it held toward the culture at the time. I appreciated the mood and the restlessness of it, like watching the…

I'm not very familiar with Kerouac, but I've at least heard people talk about it. It was far less impactful, but reading the Scott Alexander review, the very first thing that comes to mind is SLC Punk! Of course SLC Punk! makes its message pretty explicit, and by the end the main character learns that living so hedonistically was always selfish / immature / destructive / etc. When I was a kid, I was very sad for the…

I very much relate to the SLC Punk experience. The movie that came to mind for me as I was writing my comment was Dazed and Confused, it brings back that same feeling. One of the big questions I have now about Kerouac and On The Road is how much self-awareness he found. My understanding is that he was an essential part of the vanguard of American counter culture, a flawed prophet that can still be appreciated on some level.

Re: What Gets Kept

#56

Post by cassianoleal »

huhkerrf wrote: post #19
keiferski wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't making it about wokism at all. And I don't agree that you should be rooting for protagonist. That's an extremely limited way of looking at literature, much less history. I can think of half a dozen books offhand that have unpleasant or anti-hero type protagonists.

Fair enough, I withdraw the "rooting for" comment. More accurate to say that you shouldn't be actively annoyed at the protagonist.

Isn't art supposed to elicit an emotional response in the audience?

Re: What Gets Kept

#57

Post by jodrellblank »

keiferski wrote: post #16
jodrellblank wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> up-to-the-minute current moral views “You shall not steal” is the eighth commandment from the Bible, two thousand years ago.

So you don't read or enjoy any books about people that have broken any commandments?

I'm not dissing the book, I'm dissing your comment.

Re: What Gets Kept

#58

Post by cassepipe »

thelarrys wrote: post #53
cassepipe wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TIL I learned that not liking a-holes and to find the story their repititive adventures boring is pearl-clutching

no, just expressing outrage over the characters' values in a On the Road is. Judging some beat literature as if it had promised sober insight, ethical maturity, and durable philosophical yield is like taking a classic of rock music (e.g. Bohemian Rhapsody) and saying "this makes no fucking sense, its flamboyant garbage, no structural rigor whatsoever - go listen to beethoven." if you read on the road thiking you're g…

Where you see outrage, I see frustration from forcing oneself to read something everyone told you was a must-read

> carefully distilled philosophical and moral clarity

I wasn't looking for moral clarity, I was looking for something interesting to read about the world they live in, some insight

From the review posted above:

"But this is supposed to be okay, because they are visionaries. Their vision is to use the words “holy”, “ecstatic”, and “angelic” at least three times to describe every object between Toledo and Bakersfield. They don’t pass a barn, they pass a holy vision of a barn, a barn such as there must have been when the world was young, a barn whose angelic red and beatific white send them into mad ecstasies. They don’t almost hit a cow, they almost hit a holy primordial cow, the cow of all the earth, the cow whose dreamlike ecstatic mooing brings them to the brink of a rebirth such as no one has ever known."

Re: What Gets Kept

#59

Post by cassepipe »

cassepipe wrote: post #8
huhkerrf wrote: post #7

Maybe it's because I never had my On the Road phase, but this review on Kerouac I always found really strong: > On the Road is a terrible book about terrible people. Jack Kerouac and his terrible friends drive across the US about seven zillion times for no particular reason, getting in car accidents and stealing stuff and screwing women whom they promise to marry and then don’t. > Jack Kerouac’s relationship with Dea…

I have had my on the road phase when I was around 18 when I read the book but I did not vibe at all with it. I found all the characters highly unlikeable and couldn't help to think that I much better friends, even my wildest ones. But I wasn't wild enough I guess because I actually managed to finish the book, like a well behaved schoolboy.

Also it's terribly boring

Re: What Gets Kept

#60

Post by ktallett »

iammjm wrote: post #5
ktallett wrote: post #3

Jack Kerouac has always felt like a gateway for early 20 year old guys looking to be seen as literary explorers. Similar to how Orwell seems to be commonly found around your mid teens (15-17) and many are seem reading 1984. I guess it's almost a right of passage. I know many will say those are stereotypes or tropes but having worked with people from 15-28 over the course of many years in a range of roles, it's very m…

Orwell is an absolute master of both fiction and non-fiction. This dude lived and got dirty on purpose just to be able to report about it: far-away colonies, lower-class slums, foreign wars against fascists; in the end it even cost him his life. I am SO happy he is an obligatory lecture in many schools and countries; it's probably the best thing kids could be reading. He's been my hero ever since I've read him, and s…

I've read all his works and I was a big fan. But I do still believe it does attract a specific age. Orwell had some excellent work, and I didn't insult him. However I am wary of romanticising a way of life. His early works were based on his real experiences but I can't promote essays or books based on a brief entrance into that life for research as it's not quite the same. I believe all forms of media are best when they are based on your real lived experience and not roleplayed. Especially music and literature. Oasis are a particularly great example of this; you can't really write songs about a life of poverty and hope when you no longer live that.
Post reply on HN