Fight Club --> survivor

I get the feeling that you did not follow the link and read the whole article, but rather just the introduction that I posted... but that's just my interpretation of it.

Anyways, I'll agree with you that writing is a matter of taste, as is any art form, but if a lot of people are saying 2 Fast 2 Furious is in the same class as Citizen Kane, I have very little problem with someone trying to tell them why they're wrong. Oh, and all of this is of course IMHF***ingO.

Oh, and:
It's a shame that you didn't even really read the part that I quoted. The article really is well-written, and I even included a link to people telling her she's wrong in case you disagree.

__________________
"We are all worms, but I do believe I am a glow-worm."
--Winston Churchill

In my opinion Chucky P. is one of the best authors.

Choke is one of my favorites.

__________________

Hi. dear Herod!

nope, i did.

and i don't get why you quote my saying "by the way, this article uses "imagine that" quite a lot for someone who doesn't like repetitions!" as if to prove i hadn't read the whole article?? i don't get it. and yes, Palahniuk IS repetitive, it's his style. i personally love repetitions. like i like minimalism in music. question of taste, applying to anything, despite yr example:

i still think *everything* is a matter of taste. the opposite opinion is not necessarily, but actually is far too often, artsy-fartsy pedantry common among Los Angeles wannabe "actors" and NY so-called painters (of course, dressed in black...).
again, this too is a matter of opinion.
but as examples, i've been reading comic books for 31 years, and i just wouldn't compare them with Dostoievsky, NOT because they are some kind of "inferior" art, but coz they're a *different* kind of art. too many critics and "artists" think in superior/inferior categories.
now, try and compare Homer to Dostoievsky. is one superior? baloney and bull! different roles for their writing, different styles, genres, epochs...
and yes, Spiderman 2 is a GREAT movie, and 24 Hours is a great movie, and Altman's Short Cuts is a great movie and Ingmar Bergman's Persona is a great movie... just like Spiderman 2! (ohh!! what a sin, that guy is mentioning Bergman AND Spiderman in the SAME sentence!! gosh!!) i just wouldn't compare them, it's like someone asking me if i prefer Bolognese or coffee or cigarettes... i need 'em ALL! i don't compare the incomparable, especially not in these aforementioned narrow-minded categories of sup- and inf-erior. in the category "action movies based on superhero comics with this little something that makes it original and funny and sad and touching", Spiderman 2 wins, not Bergman! in the category "dark movies with experimental aspects and graphical symbolism full of a kinda desperate eroticism", Persona wins. thousand categories, not TWO! how poor would the world be then!
so, if there's one kind only of great litterature, and some kind of almighty press (should i say modern gods?? the media) defines it as being, let's say, Tolstoi... well, Palahniuk is definitely not great litterature.
i happen to not think/categorize in this way.

and i'm not saying you are that kinda pedant artsy-whatever i'm talking about. i don't know you, i'm talking generally. i thought it goes without saying.
and i did see you had given a link to another opinion, which i really appreciated and found very very honest. congrats!

I was thinking that you didn't because you only take issue with the introduction in your earlier post. If I was wrong in assuming that, I apologize.

I didn't. I quoted you fallaciously faulting her for hypocrisy so that I could show that she only uses that sort of repetition in the opening paragraph, which she specifically states is being written in an imitation of Palahniuk's style.
Look:
Thusly, it'd be like my imitating someone with a speech impediment, and you replying with "You're one to talk, you're speaking with a speech impediment right now!"

Anyways, that is a rather minor aspect of the article and the argument.

I certainly agree, for the most part.
That's not quite what I'm saying.
I don't raise any issue with someone saying that Palahniuk is an entertaining writer, simply that he's a writer on par with other great writers. You're right that Sam Raimi and Orson Welles have both made movies worth watching, but to say Sam Raimi is the new Orson Welles, or that he's better is making the same mistake you're railing against. They're very different things, beyond comparison.

But anyways, I'm saying that even within his own genre Palahniuk isn't very outstanding. There are better writers who have done the same thing. And certainly the glaring errors that the article points out in his books should be considered as something of evidence that he's simply not a very good writer at all.

Besides all that, if I did have nothing similar enough to compare Palahniuk's writing to, that would not exempt him from criticism.


And as for pedantic artsy-fartsism; I understand the general repulsion, but there's nothing wrong with just a little bit of educated elitism. It keeps up standards.

now i got it! and you got me! bravo!

that's precisely what i don't agree with. 2 things: a) Palahniuk gives me (and other people i know) MORE than entertainment. and b) what "great writers" and in what genre?

depends on... (oh i'm so repetitive!) taste(?)...
seriously, i recently read Heller and found that character who's working in an automobile insurance company and some other things Palahniuk MAY have stolen... anyway, i found Heller's style richer somehow, but that doesn't prevent me from finding stuff in Palahniuk's books i do not find in Heller's. P. is more, let's say, a fan of anecdotes. and personally, i love anecdotes, not the silly kind, but the kind that makes you consider things you had never previously given a second thought to, or not enough thoughts to, details of everyday life...
now, sure, other people may be more sensitive, or respond better, to another kind of language to make them think about those things, but me, it's the "anecdotish" (?) character present in Palahniuk's style that has the strongest effect.
and so, he wakes something in some people that other writers wake in other people...
leading us back to the "question of taste", but maybe better called "question of sensibility"...

i couldn't agree more. so many have reproached me exactly that! i'd call myself an elitist too, without any shame.

interesting chat, by the way!

I just started reading the book Haunted yesterday.


All I have to say is that Chucky P. is one twisted writer. We need more like him.

There are 23 stories in this novel that all kind of connect and I just read the first one. So far my thumbs are up for this book.

lucky guy with good tastes you are!!
tis not available in Europe yet, of course, so i ordered it three days ago - twas weird cuz i checked if Chuck had written anything new and i saw one could pre-order Haunted, which has been shipped to me and should arrive soon to this Third World!!

__________________
We're a generation of men raised by women. I'm wondering if another woman is really the answer we need.

Next time... just ask man! *laughs* Three pitchers of beer, and you still can't ask. Cut the foreplay and just ask. I would have sent it to ya!

thanx a lot, that's much appreciated... and uh... i had forgotten you are me - when i'm asleep

Just don't eat the slop in the freezer.

right, i could... choke!

My favorite quote from Survivor is "all thongs should be black, because they end up that color anyways". I also prefer Choke to this title and Lullaby is his best effort to date in my opinion. If you like Chuck P. then you may like Irvine Welsh and B. E. Ellis as well as the are both twisted, and also have had their works translated to the big screen.

First post! Wooo!

Anyways. Im a huge Chuck P fan. I'd even call him my favorite author. Note that favorite does not mean best. IMO someone could be better at something , be it books or movies or whatever , but still not be enjoyable. On top of talent , I also look for something to be entertaining as well. And if you ask me Chuck does entertains in spades.
To critisize his writing style alone would be a huge mistake because you overlook the most important aspect of any authors work , the story itself.

As far as the Survivor movie goes , I've wanted to see it made since I finished the book. It lends itself to being adapted more so then any other book by him , even Fight Club.

And lastly my favorite books I've read by Chuck , in order.

Choke
Survivor
Fight Club
Invisible Monsters
Lullaby

how thick is the book?

__________________
C0ull) 4nY0n3 73ll m3 wl-l3r3 70 637 N40l-l?

come on, is that a criteria?

it is to me..
dayum, i took this on3 book, " the club Dumas" after seeing " the night gate" and its so long i have awful concentration problems and i have rread about 1/3 of the book and i cant anymore..its too long for one book

so you've lost the last two?
Diary's great.
Haunted i keep for Seoul.