Crank is reading an excellent Sci Fi piece by Cixin Liu, The Three Body Problem trilogy in an English translation by Ken Liu. Much better than Cat Person. The Three Body problem belongs to the Trisolarians. Their three-sun system produces constant instability, and they -- having become aware of earth because of a foolish astronomer's actions during the Cultural Revolution, have decided that Earth would be a better place for them to live, so they are on their way to wipe us out and take over the planet. It will take them about 400 years to arrive. In the meantime they have sent entangled protons to the earth (which unfold to higher dimensions, turning them into super-smart spies with instant communication abilities).
Earth is trying to figure out how to survive, given the advanced's civilization's numerous advantages. — Bitter Crank
But yes, modern dating seems to have turned into its own kind of unhappiness. That's because our routinely super-educated young folk insist on analyzing the meta aspects of rituals which lead to people getting properly laid. A metaanalysis of these rituals invariably leads to intensely unsatisfactory sexual experiences. The secret to getting properly fucked is to stop thinking about it and just do it. Of course it's an act of disgusting animality -- but that who we are, that's what we do. So get busy.
Just do it and enjoy every minute of it, and when you are all done and washed up, have had a smoke and a beer, go to sleep. In the morning think about something else. Do not engage in restaurant-review-criticism of your sexual partners. If it felt good, schedule a rematch. If it didn't, get back to the bar or go on line and find the next study partner with whom you can gain carnal knowledge. — Bitter Crank
I think it's telling that these thoughts pop-up in the text, in each situation, in context in which she put herself willingly and was actually looking forward to up until something made her uncomfortable. Basically she was fine as long as her expectations were met. — Akanthinos
You are right that this is telling of the authenticity of her motivations, but not that this display some form of fear on her end. It just shows that she was no more authentic in her willingness to open herself and engage another in a relationship. Her retreat to safety was this move to "maybe his a murderer - lol - not really", which saved her from having to realize that she's as guilty of playing games as he is. — Akanthinos
It fails aesthetically because it's poorly—if competently—written. It would be impressive as an actual diary scribbled down by a relatively well-educated young person similar in age and experience to the main character herself. But artistic renditions of the real thing are supposed to be aesthetic distillations not faithful copies. And I haven't heard a lot of argument in support of the writing anyway, so I'll take it as not particularly controversial at least that we're not dealing with the top-level here. — Baden
It has a very stale and unengaging opening. — Baden
I think this only works if you are interested in casual sex only, which perhaps would suit some people, and worth following. The problem is people usually want significant others. This is where humans are utterly hopeless with poorly designed social systems to solve the problem of finding, signaling interest, and maintaining a relationship with significant other to have sex and other experiences with. With no set rules, the system gets bogged down with meta-analysis and confusion. Then you people simply falling back into tropes as the prisoner's dilemma sets in. Anyways, as we both agree this creates much unhappiness. Writers use this unhappiness and confusion to write mediocre short stories and soap operas. They seem to be the only ones benefiting. — schopenhauer1
Despite its title, The New Yorker is read nationwide, with 53 percent of its circulation in the top 10 U.S. metropolitan areas. According to Mediamark Research Inc., the average age of The New Yorker reader in 2009 was 47 ... The average household income of The New Yorker readers in 2009 was $109,877 ...
According to Pew Research, 77 percent The New Yorker's audience hold left-of-center political values, while 52 percent of those readers hold "consistently liberal" political values.[41] — Wikipedia
All this adds up to more reasons why this story is unimportant. It's "chick lit" for New Yorker and L.A. types. — Bitter Crank
I especially find it interesting when we overlook the first person narrative and somehow claim that Robert is thinking 'such and such' when no one can ever really know, as though verifying their own subjectivity in their analysis. Even a critique of the story is in itself a projection that validates guilt or sympathy or anger. It isn't a story anymore. It is an experience we are all having. We are angry for her for thinking he is ugly and fat. We are angry at him for his sexual failures. It is him. It is her. That is what a short story is supposed to do. — TimeLine
There you go. That's just some stuff that happened. It's not art. So, other than the fact that it's worth discussing sexual relations in our tech-commodified modern world, as they are complicated and confusing, the story itself qua short story is a big yawn. — Baden
I feel you are taking some conventional approach to the meaning of art - as well as Bitter - that is indicative to the adapted tastes of the literary scene as though quality writing were contained within the limitations of particular features, and this only illustrates to me your dependence on definitions. — TimeLine
Kant called this: "[a] kind of representation that is purposive in itself and, though without an end, nevertheless promotes the cultivation of the mental powers for sociable communication,” which is exactly what this story did. It is not aesthetics, but art. — TimeLine
I think you and Bitter may not have found any interest in the piece because there is no alignment or identification to the experiences and that severance to the nuances the author attempts to convey - i.e. authenticity and how we fool ourselves - is a shame, really. — TimeLine
But how could this not be used as a defense of any kind of any badly written and/or kitschy story that just happened to be topical? If we're going to disagree about whether something is art or not, its features and the context in which they are set are all we've got beyond the bare plot. Besides, which "particular" features are you referring to. Which features do you think I'm missing in my analysis? — Baden
But you seem to be focusing on the content, the plot, and its relevance again. If that's all there is to it, then anybody can make socially important art. I contend that the form is a major failing with this piece, and you don't seem to be addressing that.. — Baden
I am saying that the form is irrelevant. — TimeLine
Why not stop for a moment and listen to me; it made me think about how vulnerable to self-deception I can be. You are telling me that it was a terrible story that undermines my - and clearly a number of other people' - experience with this particular piece. — TimeLine
Ansari is a terrible comparative that you selected and have likely done so based on base similarities - sexual experiences and text messages - but that is biography and fails to elicit a similar effect fictional literature can in similar vein to the symbolic power of parables to moral reasoning. — TimeLine
It is these symbols within the fiction - and indeed in the case of Cat Person - that effects emotional responses. — TimeLine
Ok, that is the crux of our disagreement then. I'm saying form is always relevant along with content in assessing any text in terms of its artistic merit. — Baden
I loved the story in the English Patient, by the way, so I am going to ask you again, if you suggested the author used a diary instead, how would that improve the content? — TimeLine
You seem to be confusing art with aesthetics here, because this structuralism is irrelevant in this particular story - as I have already iterated in our initial discussions — TimeLine
I thought that the form in The English Patient was awful and intended to promote an air of literary sophistication by making you read and re-read paragraphs as you try to figure out what he is attempting to convey, but is that literary snobbishness what made it win all those awards? If writing something that goes over my head and forces me to second-guess myself or try to interpret and read into what you are saying, is it verification of some supreme quality to be admired simply because it goes over my head? — TimeLine
This falls under the category of short story form. It may further be considered a "slice of life" short story. Certainly both of these can be considered "art" in that it is literature that is readable and has a structure. — schopenhauer1
This is not an underdog story. This is about a person who does have ability to attract others and keep their interest- to the point of them being possessive. There is something not that interesting about those with a privileged perspective. A person who can get what they want (in this case in the dating world), but finds out they don't really want it, is just not that interesting to a lot of people, and hard to identify with unless you are someone who also falls into that demographic. — schopenhauer1
In the categorical sense I'd say that Cat Person certainly counts as art. I think what you mean by art is in the latter sense, though let me know if you disagree. — Moliere
I'd say Cat Person is more than a diary entry because it has a character which follows a progression from distinct uncertainty to certainty -- she undergoes a change of character, though not one that is exactly specified but more negative. It's not that she knows what she wants at the end, it's that she knows one particular she does not want. — Moliere
So, sure, maybe it doesn't live up to some great work of literary fiction, but I'd still say that it's good, I think, in spite of being uncertain about all the qualities that make a short story good. — Moliere
I'm talking evaluatively, and my evaluation is that it's not art at all and therefore it's not good art either. Being published in the New Yorker doesn't make it art in the categorical sense you quote. The New Yorker is a business and despite having a good historical record can make commercial decisions that have little or nothing to do with considerations of artistic merit. As I said to Schope, just writing words on a page that follow the structure of a work of art doesn't make what you create a work of art. And as I suggested to TL, emotional impact alone is not enough because that can be got from texts other than the artistic. It's the interplay of form and content that counts. — Baden
Maybe you've misunderstood me. I agree it is more than a diary entry or is intended to be (in terms of structure but doesn't offer more in general because it largely fails structurally and aesthetically). It does give us the standard character transformation, and the point would be to analyze that because it's relevant. I was arguing earlier that without bringing the form explicitly into the critique, no amount of discussion of its emotional impact would wrap up the question of its artistic value as a short story. (But I feel I've said something along those lines too many times now, so I should just let it be.) — Baden
And you are in the majority. I'm happy to remain in the minority in thinking that it's not of any artistic merit but is possibly useful as a conversation starter. Leaving that aside, as we're unlikely to agree and neither of us has a monopoly on artistic wisdom, what are a couple of short stories that do live up to being great works of literary fiction in your view? — Baden
I pretty much adhere to the institutional theory of art. What makes a work of art a work of art is that it is part of an artworld -- which includes creators, audiences, histories of art, various and changing standards for evaluating said art as good or bad, and (in our case) institutions which showcase art. So the difference between a can of Campbell's soup in the grocery story and one in a museum is that the can of Cambell's soup in the museum is part of the artworld, whereas the one in the grocery story is not. — Moliere
↪Bitter Crank Do you think, Bitette, that you probably lack an understanding of what the story means given you've enjoyed penis for supper for these long years? — TimeLine
Yes, it shows us he was a bad guy and that her fears were justified with a metaphorical sledgehammer in the form of a text message. I can think of a million more subtle ways to do a similar thing. But maybe the author felt the readership would need a sledgehammer to get it. And judging by the amount of shares, she may have been right. That to me is sad. Sorry, I mean SAD!!! — Baden
Just to quickly note that I would agree with that, but the New Yorker is not the literary equivalent of a museum (even if it does have a historically good record). If that short story were to be taught in our top universities as art, I'd have to accept it as institutionally art, but I'd still evaluatively deny it was. — Baden
"To Build a Fire" is great. I'll read "The Babysitter". — Baden
Let me know what you think! — Moliere
You haven't addressed my questions on specifics. Anyhow, if it helps to clarify... — Baden
You could have got just as much out of it on the level you are getting something out of it. Ergo, the form is superfluous to the commentary. But, the story qua short story can't be analyzed without reference to the short story form by definition. That doesn't mean it has to follow a standard form just that the form is necessarily relevant as a reference point. — Baden
No, because I've consistently emphasized the importance of the interplay between form and content. And form is never irrelevant to a work of art qua art (As for "this structuralism", I don't know what you mean by that or how it relates to my general contention re form). Have you read my Von Trier example? Any comment? — Baden
What I'm saying is that this means the story fails as a short story because it offers nothing more than a straight diary account would while seemingly trying to follow the standard short story structure and failing to do so effectively, for example, in terms of the beginning and ending (which most here seem to agree with, so I'm not sure how anyone could can continue to contend it succeeds as a short story). But I don't want to be sound overly pedantic. I don't want to deny the work may have some value. That's a different question. Considering its effect on some people here, it seems that it does. — Baden
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.