(no subject)
Mar. 16th, 2012 08:14 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So, Jay McInerney and Donna Tartt and Bret Easton Ellis all went to school together, which seems to explain a lot about their writing. I'm really glad I didn't go to school where they did, anyway.
McInerney also shows up in one of Ellis's books, Lunar Park, which is a faux-autobiography written as if the narrator was Ellis himself (it's complicated). I know that American Psycho and McInerney's "Bright Lights, Big City" came out very close together -- Bright Lights in '89, Psycho in '91 -- and both in their own way are considered defining novels about the 80s. One of my friends asked why on earth I was reading Bright Lights because "Yes yes, we've defined the eighties, we lived through them, who cares?" and then realized "Oh my god, you didn't live through the eighties, did you?"
Not really. I was nine when Bright Lights, Big City was published.
But I don't really care about the eighties, in the sense that I have no special attachment to the decade and wasn't reading Ellis's work in order to understand it better. Mostly I'm reading McInerney because of his connection to Ellis, to see what other writers in similar circumstances were writing about. I think the problem is that Bright Lights, Big City, while published first, still reads like a bland, generic version of American Psycho. In some ways that's not a bad thing -- it's not quite as culture-specific and thus ends up being a lot less dated, which on a surface level makes it almost more relevant. Take out some of the fashion and most of the coke and the narrator could be a hipster in 2012. It's very much in the vein of Catcher In The Rye, with a hyperintelligent but aimless hero trying to figure out where he fits in. It's a lot less endearing in a twenty-six-year-old than in Catcher's teenage Holden.
But I feel like it has less relevance in the end purely because it has less depth -- it's less dated, but it just plain has less to say. It's a fast read, and it's not boring (okay sometimes it's boring) and I finished reading it, which is a big feat these days given how many books I toss aside when it becomes clear they're not going to get better. I just don't really think it's a book anyone genuinely needs to read.
McInerney also shows up in one of Ellis's books, Lunar Park, which is a faux-autobiography written as if the narrator was Ellis himself (it's complicated). I know that American Psycho and McInerney's "Bright Lights, Big City" came out very close together -- Bright Lights in '89, Psycho in '91 -- and both in their own way are considered defining novels about the 80s. One of my friends asked why on earth I was reading Bright Lights because "Yes yes, we've defined the eighties, we lived through them, who cares?" and then realized "Oh my god, you didn't live through the eighties, did you?"
Not really. I was nine when Bright Lights, Big City was published.
But I don't really care about the eighties, in the sense that I have no special attachment to the decade and wasn't reading Ellis's work in order to understand it better. Mostly I'm reading McInerney because of his connection to Ellis, to see what other writers in similar circumstances were writing about. I think the problem is that Bright Lights, Big City, while published first, still reads like a bland, generic version of American Psycho. In some ways that's not a bad thing -- it's not quite as culture-specific and thus ends up being a lot less dated, which on a surface level makes it almost more relevant. Take out some of the fashion and most of the coke and the narrator could be a hipster in 2012. It's very much in the vein of Catcher In The Rye, with a hyperintelligent but aimless hero trying to figure out where he fits in. It's a lot less endearing in a twenty-six-year-old than in Catcher's teenage Holden.
But I feel like it has less relevance in the end purely because it has less depth -- it's less dated, but it just plain has less to say. It's a fast read, and it's not boring (okay sometimes it's boring) and I finished reading it, which is a big feat these days given how many books I toss aside when it becomes clear they're not going to get better. I just don't really think it's a book anyone genuinely needs to read.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 01:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 05:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 06:12 pm (UTC)Maybe the big hair and shoulder pads were meant to help shield people from fallout?
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 06:49 pm (UTC)Yes, largely a niche thing - but the US produced so much that was truly great during that decade, and still holds up very well, and not terribly dated-sounding, most of it.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-17 01:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-17 03:10 am (UTC)I went to Antioch ('87-'92) in Yellow Springs, and I had a radio show on WYSO for a little while. Graveyard shift, of course.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-17 05:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-17 04:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 02:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 02:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 03:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 02:45 pm (UTC)see what other writers in similar circumstances were writing aboutimpress Coworker Crush.Fixed it for you. ;)
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 03:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 03:32 pm (UTC)I've never had any desire to read Norman Mailer, and I bet if you asked around a lot of kids in their teens have never heard of him or of Gore Vidal. One of the major reasons Hemingway and Fitzgerald are remembered is that they're often required high school reading; not that they're not good writers, but a significant portion of literary memory (at least in the US) is driven by what we were made to read in high school.
I don't think it's that writers from early to mid 20th century had more to say; I think it's just that they said it in ways that are more tolerable to our educational system, which itself is stuck somewhere around the end of the 1950s.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 03:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 03:52 pm (UTC)(Hooooo yeah I remember the 80s. Hell, I remember the 70s.)
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 04:42 pm (UTC)As for the other recommendations, Capote wrote "In Cold Blood" before Mailer wrote "Executioner's Song" and has been granted the label of having invented the true crime novel genre. Of course, Mailer won the Pulitzer for ES and Capote felt very slighted. He never spoke to Mailer again, afaik.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 04:47 pm (UTC)I haven't read Executioner's Song, but I have to say I wasn't that impressed by In Cold Blood, either. Props to him for inventing a new genre, I genuinely do respect that, but it wasn't really a very good book.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 04:43 pm (UTC)Compare "American Psycho" with "In Cold Blood." Both books about murderers and murders. Current Kindle rankings are 3400 for ICB and 8600 for AP. Not bad for a novel that is fifty years old.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 06:24 pm (UTC)University when he was studying with Ray Carver -- Jay, in fact, was my study partner
at the time. And he attended Williams, not Bennington, like Tartt and Ellis. "Bright Lights"
was a short story that Gary Fisketjon read and convinced him to expand into a short
novel for their new Vintage paperback series. "Less Than Zero" also came out in that
series, hence the connection. Tama Janowitz (remember her?) was also in that first
Vintage group.
To give Jay his due, he's written a number of fairly serious works, but because he's
a partyboy (and always has been) I think it's overshadowed his real accomplishments.
And, unlike Bret, Jay isn't a dickhead. He's basically a really nice guy. Ellis -- not at all.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 06:27 pm (UTC)I'm afraid I've never heard of Tama Janowitz, though, unless she was one of the party kids Ellis mentioned in Lunar Park.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-18 03:55 am (UTC)which was very big for about ten minutes. It's pretty unreadable now.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 06:56 pm (UTC)Those books were supposed to "speak to me," but they just didn't. It was like trying to force myself to be interested in someone else's jargon-filled conversation about stock trading.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-16 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-17 09:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-18 03:56 am (UTC)the toilet.