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

61–70 of 85 posts

Re: What Gets Kept

#61

Post by pixelatedindex »

breezybottom wrote: post #41
keiferski wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moral views of the average person circa 1930 are very different from one today. But I read old books for their interesting stories, viewpoints on life, literary quality, etc. – not to tut-tut someone for having different moral views than me, a hundred years later. So it doesn't bother me. Like I said, I really cannot understand the mindset of someone that reads a book from another era/civilization and focuses on…

I don't see it. The 1930s weren't that long ago, there are still people alive who lived through them. If you were talking about ancient Egypt, you might have a point.

As a brown person in the US, I certainly would have felt a difference between then and now…

Re: What Gets Kept

#62

Post by thelarrys »

cassepipe wrote: post #58
thelarrys wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 word…

So, he went into a Taco Bell and was mad that his Beefy 5-Layer Burrito wasn't actually the Wendy's Big Bacon Classic Triple that he wanted, got it.

Re: What Gets Kept

#63

Post by breezybottom »

keiferski wrote: post #45
breezybottom wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see it. The 1930s weren't that long ago, there are still people alive who lived through them. If you were talking about ancient Egypt, you might have a point.

The 1930s had radically different opinions on race, gender, religion, and a host of other things as compared to today.

Define "radical"

Re: What Gets Kept

#64

Post by breezybottom »

pixelatedindex wrote: post #61
breezybottom wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see it. The 1930s weren't that long ago, there are still people alive who lived through them. If you were talking about ancient Egypt, you might have a point.

As a brown person in the US, I certainly would have felt a difference between then and now…

The United States isn't the entire world.

Re: What Gets Kept

#65

Post by cassepipe »

thelarrys wrote: post #62
cassepipe wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 word…

So, he went into a Taco Bell and was mad that his Beefy 5-Layer Burrito wasn't actually the Wendy's Big Bacon Classic Triple that he wanted, got it.

Meh. You could also say that he went to the italian restaurant and the pasta was undercooked.

I understand the argument but what is the "dish" OTR is serving ?

So instead of using a metaphor, can you tell us what you experienced when reading the kind of lines he is referring to when you read the book ?

Re: What Gets Kept

#67

Post by bshepard »

pjc50 wrote: post #26
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…

And in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance , they don't even manage to do any motorcycle maintenance! (I think people have misunderstood the appeal of the book, probably because the psychological conditions of the mid-20th century are unrecognizable. It is significant that the book is from 1957, a whole decade before Easy Rider and the general transition period centered on 1968)

This is untrue, the book is filled with incidents of motorcycle maintenance. Perhaps you have not read it? The second chapter centers around a complex issue involving a piston seizure:

"“I remove a glove with my teeth, reach down and feel the aluminum side cover of the engine. The temperature is fine. Too warm to leave my hand there, not so hot I get a burn. Nothing wrong there.

On an air-cooled engine like this, extreme overheating can cause a “seizure.” This machine has had one-in fact, three of them. I check it from time to time the same way I would check a patient who has had a heart attack, even though it seems cured.”

Re: What Gets Kept

#68

Post by bshepard »

keiferski wrote: post #9
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…

It must be so exhausting to go through life only enjoying things that match one’s up-to-the-minute current moral views. I guess all biographies of influential people are basically out, as being successful in 1000BC or 1500AD required one to do things considered unethical today. It feels a bit like religious fundamentalism with a different veneer.

It is less exciting than religious fundamentalism!

Re: What Gets Kept

#69

Post by thelarrys »

cassepipe wrote: post #65
thelarrys wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, he went into a Taco Bell and was mad that his Beefy 5-Layer Burrito wasn't actually the Wendy's Big Bacon Classic Triple that he wanted, got it.

Meh. You could also say that he went to the italian restaurant and the pasta was undercooked. I understand the argument but what is the "dish" OTR is serving ? So instead of using a metaphor, can you tell us what you experienced when reading the kind of lines he is referring to when you read the book ?

OTR is "serving" beat literature. But that whole framing of art critique is problematic, it's a very "what do I get out of this?" instead of "what IS this, exactly?" I think what is abrasive about this review is that it's a voice of a picky consumer rather than someone who appreciates art. Like a demanding tourist in an italian village, snapping his fingers at the native waiters and complaining in english that his spaghetti is too aldente, because back at olive garden it's nice and soft. You get what you give, and this is not a generous review.

What I personally experienced is not very relevant, but I was moved by the book - whether it's positive or negative doesn't really matter - it's jazz.

Re: What Gets Kept

#70

Post by watwut »

keiferski wrote: post #9
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…

It must be so exhausting to go through life only enjoying things that match one’s up-to-the-minute current moral views. I guess all biographies of influential people are basically out, as being successful in 1000BC or 1500AD required one to do things considered unethical today. It feels a bit like religious fundamentalism with a different veneer.

> It must be so exhausting to go through life only enjoying things that match one’s up-to-the-minute current moral views.

It is not that much exhausting to not celebrate abuse. In fact, most people are not abusers, most books are not celebrating it. But, there are subcultures that do treat abuse as a cool inspirable thing to do. That is what the quote references. And it is exhausting to be around such cultures once you have seen or understand consequences of what they celebrate. And that ideology is how one gets Epstein enablers.

Vice signaling and principled opposition against "acknowledging there are victims here" are weird and destructive taboos.

>I guess all biographies of influential people are basically out, as being successful in 1000BC or 1500AD required one to do things considered unethical today.

Maybe this means we should not celebrate success itself, but acknowledge harm many successful people do to make themselves famous, rich and powerful. But more importantly, this claim of yours is frequently just not true. It is something people say to defend their heroes, trying to defend unusually horrible stuff that back then people themselves found horrible back then, fought against and criticized a lot. You can write about bad stuff historical person caused without framing it as good or cool thing, really. You can even acknowledge that their opposition had a point.

We know that being abuser is something that makes certain people admire you more.

Post reply on HN