I agree wholly with the sentiments presented here, and I think it especially important to bring these ideas to young people. Also, I really enjoyed Simmons’ Ilium and Olympos.
I took Jeffro to task for his assertion to read nothing after 1980 on Twitter before I was permabanned. I pointed out that may be his assertion had merit for Anglophone literature but not outside and even then..
For example, in Catalan, a lot of the 'classics' were published starting in the 1960s when the Franconist regime relaxed its cultural genocide polices.
The Latin American boom is from the 60s until 1979 and so on. He conceded that each region/language has its cut off point, but he still held his position.
I flatly disagreed with him and still do,
My vehement disagreement originated from the canon isn't set in concrete and fixed forever. Misha responding to Cirsova remarked similarly. He noted his canon was different from the latter's. In other word, to create content, the canon will vary depending on the type of story, but the former is still there; always present even if unacknowledged
Anyway, this ongoing discussion about the canon has been salutary and allowed us to sharpen our arguments.
I tend to take it for granted since past writers are my field of study, and I guess also because of a different national-cultural environment; I didn't realize before this whole affair that writers of all people had to be reminded of the topic. I hope they'll listen to you and A. Hellene if not Jeffro.
My comment to Xavier’s comment on my blog, reproduced here, because it says all I want to say:
There are different canons for different artistic milieus, sure, but at some point you do need some sort of agreed-upon canon. To paraphrase Curtis Yarvin, you either have a Protestant way of doing it (all canons are correct) or a Catholic way (error is not tolerated). I choose the latter.
Jeffro’s admonition to not read anything written after 1980 is a hyperbolic shit-test, for lack of a better word, and a snide reaction to those who say “don’t read anything written by white men” and not to be taken totally literally. Jeffro gets off on getting people riled up because reactions to his statement are a litmus test for how well someone understands the need for canon, and to realize that much of the literary canon has been deliberately erased from the public consciousness by, to quote Jeffro, “very bad people.”
I get where Jeffro is coming from. My disagreements are over form and not substance; I don’t see the need to deliberately antagonize friends and allies. That said, I’m starting to come around because to act like canon doesn’t matter is no different than post-modernism “destroy them past” year zero thinking, AND if we’re going to compete, we have to be better. Pastiche of past work work without understanding and engaging with it gets us nowhere. In fact, it might move us back.
I guess Alexandru and I are kind of like the “good” cops. I don’t want to alienate or drive away allies and readers. But, I want there to be standards of quality and knowledge. Not that I’m an expert, but I’m trying to read the past works and understand them. It does matter.
A critical scene is needed, and critics need to be well-versed as well. Make fun of the literary snobs all you want, they know their stuff. We need our own literary snobs.
I'm going to answer here, but I think this might require a longer post itself.
I believe in solid standards and knowledge and I think I make a reasonable case for this in my above post. I will disagree and have a conversation with anybody on these topics. I also believe in a robust critical community where we can disagree about things and also hone the quality of work put out.
But, I also think online platforms are toxic, dehumanizing, hives. I think as good men, good people, and good Christians, acting like losers and insulting each other online is not edifying.
If you think that hiding behind a screen and insulting people over fantasy stories and role playing games as a man over 40 with adult children is respectable than you and I are not on the same side because I would be embarrassed to look my daughter in the eyes and tell her that I spend my time on Twitter insulting people because they don't read early 20th century pulp stories about elves.
You aren't being a "bad cop" you are being an online cuck bugman who digitally masturbates by insulting your own side.
I agree wholly with the sentiments presented here, and I think it especially important to bring these ideas to young people. Also, I really enjoyed Simmons’ Ilium and Olympos.
Alexandru,
I took Jeffro to task for his assertion to read nothing after 1980 on Twitter before I was permabanned. I pointed out that may be his assertion had merit for Anglophone literature but not outside and even then..
For example, in Catalan, a lot of the 'classics' were published starting in the 1960s when the Franconist regime relaxed its cultural genocide polices.
The Latin American boom is from the 60s until 1979 and so on. He conceded that each region/language has its cut off point, but he still held his position.
I flatly disagreed with him and still do,
My vehement disagreement originated from the canon isn't set in concrete and fixed forever. Misha responding to Cirsova remarked similarly. He noted his canon was different from the latter's. In other word, to create content, the canon will vary depending on the type of story, but the former is still there; always present even if unacknowledged
Anyway, this ongoing discussion about the canon has been salutary and allowed us to sharpen our arguments.
xavier
Your best post so far.
Thank you. This is a topic I feel deeply about.
I tend to take it for granted since past writers are my field of study, and I guess also because of a different national-cultural environment; I didn't realize before this whole affair that writers of all people had to be reminded of the topic. I hope they'll listen to you and A. Hellene if not Jeffro.
My comment to Xavier’s comment on my blog, reproduced here, because it says all I want to say:
There are different canons for different artistic milieus, sure, but at some point you do need some sort of agreed-upon canon. To paraphrase Curtis Yarvin, you either have a Protestant way of doing it (all canons are correct) or a Catholic way (error is not tolerated). I choose the latter.
Jeffro’s admonition to not read anything written after 1980 is a hyperbolic shit-test, for lack of a better word, and a snide reaction to those who say “don’t read anything written by white men” and not to be taken totally literally. Jeffro gets off on getting people riled up because reactions to his statement are a litmus test for how well someone understands the need for canon, and to realize that much of the literary canon has been deliberately erased from the public consciousness by, to quote Jeffro, “very bad people.”
I get where Jeffro is coming from. My disagreements are over form and not substance; I don’t see the need to deliberately antagonize friends and allies. That said, I’m starting to come around because to act like canon doesn’t matter is no different than post-modernism “destroy them past” year zero thinking, AND if we’re going to compete, we have to be better. Pastiche of past work work without understanding and engaging with it gets us nowhere. In fact, it might move us back.
I think you are too quick to discount the good fruits of bullying our side into getting into shape. But every bad cop needs a good cop.
JD, after seeing some things, I’m starting to come around on Jeffro’s methodology myself.
To be clear, there should be a good cop to Jeffro's bad cop, a carrot to go with the stick. In the meantime, I seem to have fallen into 'worse cop'.
So that would make Jeffro the good cop, then?
I guess Alexandru and I are kind of like the “good” cops. I don’t want to alienate or drive away allies and readers. But, I want there to be standards of quality and knowledge. Not that I’m an expert, but I’m trying to read the past works and understand them. It does matter.
A critical scene is needed, and critics need to be well-versed as well. Make fun of the literary snobs all you want, they know their stuff. We need our own literary snobs.
No, that just makes me an arsehole. But it's out of love. I want them to grow, because we need men on the barricades.
Fair enough!
I'm going to answer here, but I think this might require a longer post itself.
I believe in solid standards and knowledge and I think I make a reasonable case for this in my above post. I will disagree and have a conversation with anybody on these topics. I also believe in a robust critical community where we can disagree about things and also hone the quality of work put out.
But, I also think online platforms are toxic, dehumanizing, hives. I think as good men, good people, and good Christians, acting like losers and insulting each other online is not edifying.
If you think that hiding behind a screen and insulting people over fantasy stories and role playing games as a man over 40 with adult children is respectable than you and I are not on the same side because I would be embarrassed to look my daughter in the eyes and tell her that I spend my time on Twitter insulting people because they don't read early 20th century pulp stories about elves.
You aren't being a "bad cop" you are being an online cuck bugman who digitally masturbates by insulting your own side.