The Emperor's New Clothes

[raefinlay]

Sometimes, reading "literary" fiction, I feel like the child at the edge of the crowd. I watch the emperor parade by in his fancy carriage, holding himself in proud posture purely by his elitist will, listening to the adoring but vacuous cheering. I'm the only one pointing out the fact that he's NEKKID as a brand new baby. (But stoopider-looking.)

Ok, let me back up a bit. I just read a short story in a consumer mag known for its literary fiction. (I won't tell you which one, but it starts with a "New" and ends in a "Yorker.") And I wanted to pour kerosene all over its formless, existential wallowing. *pyro*

Can't people see the nakedness here? How long until we have the nerve to point and laugh appropriately?

Comments

[raecarson.livejournal.com]

There is absolutely no doubt that I don't get it. *grin*

I'm a religious humanist, not a relativist. Therefore, I do not believe that every work on the planet has the potential to be someone's Rembrandt. Some of it is and will always be pure junk. (Yours is not, I think, but of course that's just my opinion...)

I have a very high and wide tolerance for formlessness in the visual arts. Not so much in literature, partly because of the time investment.

I *do* understand your point. Perhaps it's just a matter of preference. I'd be surprised, though, if most readers of the particular story I read actually got it.

[janeorben.livejournal.com]

You seem to have interpreted me as saying that all art has equal merit. That is not at all what I meant. What I meant was that sometimes people who don't "get" a work of art assume there is nothing of value to get.

Another example - when I saw the film "Shakespeare in Love" I absolutely hated it and thought it was pretentious crap. But all my friends and family loved it. They explained what they "got" about it, and while I eventually understood what they were saying, I still didn't "feel" it. I will probably never enjoy that movie for all it is truly worth, but I must acknowledge now that it is a high quality film by the standards of its intended genre.

You say you'd be surprised if "most" readers got the story you read in the New Yorker. So art is of greater value if it appeals to more people? And what are you saying about the editor that accepted the story for publication? That they aren't knowledgeable enough about literary fiction to pick a story that actually has some real artistic merit?

[raecarson.livejournal.com]

I have no doubt that the editor is extremely knowledgable. More so than I, that's for sure.

I also believe that influences other than quality determine editorial selection. The need to reach a certain quota of international authors, for example. Or translation pieces. (Certain philosophies, authors, etc.)

Sometimes people who don't "get" a work of art assume there is nothing of value to get. Agreed. A work's value cannot be wholly determined by who gets it and who doesn't.

So art is of greater value if it appeals to more people? I'm of two minds about this. If a painting is crap to everyone but ONE PERSON, then yes, the painting has value. But only to that person. Doesn't mean it should be on the wall of the Guggenheim. Conversely, I think of stuff like modern Christianity's Left Behind series, which represents some of the poorest literature known to man. But millions of people find value in that crap. Of course, thinking it's crap assumes certain conventions of literature than I am universally applying.

Thus my vacillation. *shrug*

[aaron-mag.livejournal.com]

I like what you are saying and I agree with it. We should never be so convinced of the 'rightness of the published word' that we don't say, "Can anyone else not see that this is crap?"

Sort of like in that Ben Stiller movie where the guy yells, "Who cares about Derek Zoolander. The guy only has one look. Blue Steel, Magnum...they're all the same. I feel like a crazy man here!"

:D

[raecarson.livejournal.com]

Exactly!!! A perfect example of how trending like a school of mindless fish can overwhelm our sensibilities.

Gawd, I loved that movie.

[buymeaclue.livejournal.com]

We should never be so convinced of the 'rightness of the published word' that we don't say, "Can anyone else not see that this is crap?"

I would submit that we should perhaps never be so convinced of our opinion on the published word that we ask, "Can anyone else not see that this is crap?" without first asking simply, "What do you guys think of this?"

Same discussion. Much friendlier.

[raecarson.livejournal.com]

At last a voice of reason. *sigh* You're right, of course.