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.
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 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.
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.