I'm not much on "literature" because I'm a historian, but I'd rather do literally anything than read self important Europeans, especially Potato Irish, in that oh so painfully avant garde era right before 1914. They're just so suffused with too many isms, coupled with that prissy Victorian earnestness. And if there's one thing about the Potato Irish, its that they never shut the fuck up about being Irish-its negative identity on steroids, and that got old and stale long ago. I'll take Melville's "Moby Dick" all day, every day, because you can ignore all the philosophical Yankee nonsense and read it as a badass whaling story with some epic badass whaling. And its a Led Zeppelin song.
I'm glad I have this Substack to catch me up on all the cultural goings on, because I was never this "cultured" growing up. Also, sadly we never got to read the Odyssey, just flipping Animal Farm. Piss off Orwell, you British Trotskyist Fed.
The best way to disavow yourself of the comparison between Homestuck and Ulysses is to try reading Ulysses. It only takes a chapter or so to understand what people mean when they call Ulysses "experimental", and it's not at all like Homestuck.
"there’s a time and a place for challenging literature, and, frankly, I think we might be in dire need of some in a culture suffused with thoughtless garbage."
Sure. Absolutely. On the other hand, though:
"These two qualities are perhaps the two greatest reasons, aside from Joyce’s frequent changes in style, that Ulysses is considered such a difficult text to tackle. They’re purposefully challenging, cerebral, and demand a lot of thought, consideration, and effort on the reader to parse."
Stuff like this tends to give a gut reaction of "well, maybe, but is it actually worth all that effort"? That is, if you do put in the hours to gain an encyclopedic knowledge of 1910s Dublin and still more hours poring over the nuances of the text, is there actually a profound, worthwhile meaning at the bottom there? This is not a rhetorical question. Or at least mostly not one.
This whole High Art(TM) discussion leaves me conflicted, because I do agree with your opinion I quoted up above that we need more thoughtful cultural pieces. At the same time, though, I know I'll probably never read Ulysses, and if I did read it I'd have a miserable time. (See also: my reaction to running into the craze for all things Foucault in college).
This leaves me in kind of an awkward position, since I'm tempted to ask if much if this is simply people being meta and tricksy and fancy for the sake of it, as a kind of artful posture, rather than focusing on craftsmanship. Especially tempting here, since we do have Finnegan's Wake, which does seem to tip over that line. Compare the abstract vs figurative art debate. But then again...of course I'd say that, wouldn't I, since I never liked or got all this High Art super fanciful stuff anyway. Maybe I just genuinely am a philistine. :P
So I feel like I'm "falling between two chairs" sometimes in that regard (is that an expression in the US too?). My holy grail is the solidly middlebrow, in between Joyce and brainless slop. I want to see more stuff in that big middle ground.
"To grasp Ulysses fully, one needs a working understanding of the city of Dublin in general, Irish culture..."
Am I the only one who could hear the "to be fair, you do need a very high IQ to understand Rick and Morty" meme in my head when I read that part?
Anyway, Ulysses is one thing, but I suspect the sheer length is what makes up most of the difficulty with Homestuck? Looking forward to seeing how you develop the comparison. And that Loud House fanfic is terrifying, haha. (Also love that you've made a space where we're talking about Ulysses and The Loud House in the same breath, that's glorious absurd)
This reads like the first chapter of a Lovecraft work, I approve.
I'm not much on "literature" because I'm a historian, but I'd rather do literally anything than read self important Europeans, especially Potato Irish, in that oh so painfully avant garde era right before 1914. They're just so suffused with too many isms, coupled with that prissy Victorian earnestness. And if there's one thing about the Potato Irish, its that they never shut the fuck up about being Irish-its negative identity on steroids, and that got old and stale long ago. I'll take Melville's "Moby Dick" all day, every day, because you can ignore all the philosophical Yankee nonsense and read it as a badass whaling story with some epic badass whaling. And its a Led Zeppelin song.
Oh boy are you in for fun when it comes to Internet culture.
Take all that you hate, and somehow make it even more FnG(er).
(Also, hey man.)
I'm glad I have this Substack to catch me up on all the cultural goings on, because I was never this "cultured" growing up. Also, sadly we never got to read the Odyssey, just flipping Animal Farm. Piss off Orwell, you British Trotskyist Fed.
Seriously, great read.
The best way to disavow yourself of the comparison between Homestuck and Ulysses is to try reading Ulysses. It only takes a chapter or so to understand what people mean when they call Ulysses "experimental", and it's not at all like Homestuck.
You deserve way more subscribers. Such detailed and insightful articles on random shit that I never assumed I'd be interested to read about.
"there’s a time and a place for challenging literature, and, frankly, I think we might be in dire need of some in a culture suffused with thoughtless garbage."
Sure. Absolutely. On the other hand, though:
"These two qualities are perhaps the two greatest reasons, aside from Joyce’s frequent changes in style, that Ulysses is considered such a difficult text to tackle. They’re purposefully challenging, cerebral, and demand a lot of thought, consideration, and effort on the reader to parse."
Stuff like this tends to give a gut reaction of "well, maybe, but is it actually worth all that effort"? That is, if you do put in the hours to gain an encyclopedic knowledge of 1910s Dublin and still more hours poring over the nuances of the text, is there actually a profound, worthwhile meaning at the bottom there? This is not a rhetorical question. Or at least mostly not one.
This whole High Art(TM) discussion leaves me conflicted, because I do agree with your opinion I quoted up above that we need more thoughtful cultural pieces. At the same time, though, I know I'll probably never read Ulysses, and if I did read it I'd have a miserable time. (See also: my reaction to running into the craze for all things Foucault in college).
This leaves me in kind of an awkward position, since I'm tempted to ask if much if this is simply people being meta and tricksy and fancy for the sake of it, as a kind of artful posture, rather than focusing on craftsmanship. Especially tempting here, since we do have Finnegan's Wake, which does seem to tip over that line. Compare the abstract vs figurative art debate. But then again...of course I'd say that, wouldn't I, since I never liked or got all this High Art super fanciful stuff anyway. Maybe I just genuinely am a philistine. :P
So I feel like I'm "falling between two chairs" sometimes in that regard (is that an expression in the US too?). My holy grail is the solidly middlebrow, in between Joyce and brainless slop. I want to see more stuff in that big middle ground.
"To grasp Ulysses fully, one needs a working understanding of the city of Dublin in general, Irish culture..."
Am I the only one who could hear the "to be fair, you do need a very high IQ to understand Rick and Morty" meme in my head when I read that part?
Anyway, Ulysses is one thing, but I suspect the sheer length is what makes up most of the difficulty with Homestuck? Looking forward to seeing how you develop the comparison. And that Loud House fanfic is terrifying, haha. (Also love that you've made a space where we're talking about Ulysses and The Loud House in the same breath, that's glorious absurd)