the most promising young american author is TAO LIN

like this is a moment where ppl with moral transgressions are losing their careers and being publicly shamed, ridiculed, held up as evil, and banned from the public forum - having their work shelved. not a moment when ppl are being forced to read those works and celebrate those people. so it's kinda silly i feel to be worrying about the latter? no one is arguing on this thread really about whether tao lin is good or not (maybe a little bit that's the argument) but about whether you should read him bc of his failings. the fault lines that are being fought over are not where you're suggesting they are.

ime ppl who are not* willing to engage w/ shitty artists are far more aligned [w/ the zeitgiest] (clarification)

i think the moral outrage thus far has had little appreciable consequence on the bad actors. Charlie Rose got fired; everyone else seems fine? He got away with it long enough to become rich, I assume? Like people are talking about Louis CK et. al. and his movie got pulled from release but it's not clear to me that he will suffer long-term. just because people freak out on twitter doesn't mean anyone has been banned from the public forum, whatever that means.

i am nothing if not silly.

this moment we're in is like two seconds long in the span of history. i think it's too early to say people have been over-punished. most of them have faced no consequences except people saying publicly they don't like them.

but my point isn't about the artists and their feelings (about which i couldn't care less), it's about the audience and the conversational climate. and just as a side note while this particular two second moment is about powerful men injuring people around them with their behavior (and being punished for it), the moment of moral/political attenuation has been going on for quite a while and it swings back and forth (and of course irl much of our population is in open rebellion against it). it seems to me like ppl who are willing to condemn bad behavior / politics have a privileged discursive position within the left media/academy and their opinions have become more or less hegemonic. there are numerous topics of conversation that no one would ever have on ilx bc they'd just get banned or whatever and maybe this is a useful corrective or some level of censorship is a valuable thing for a community to have (i mean this is certainly true on some level), but i feel like positing that we're swinging towards condemning the victims / mocking the morally concerned is just not true. on the right maybe but that's not the discourse we participate in.

I mean, he's the most 4c*an literary writer out there.

i don't even like his writing lol i wrote some mean things about him above

there are numerous topics of conversation that no one would ever have on ilx bc they'd just get banned or whatever

is this true? it seems untrue to me. it might be that the current participants on ilx share a set of attitudes toward these topics and ilxors who don't no longer post here. maybe that is the same thing from your perspective.

i was not claiming that our culture is swinging toward mocking the morally concerned. i was irritated by treeship posting that he doesn't read literature for moral instruction because it smacked of attitudes of "i can loftily separate art from the artist because i better understand what literature is than these simpletons who can't." perhaps that was unfair to treeship. i have certainly encountered that attitude repeatedly in life. nb. i teach english literature and have spent most of my life studying it (god that is true!) and so i am not claiming these attitudes are widespread amongst normal people.

certainly it is poor form for me to post so much in a thread dedicated to a writer whose work i have not read.

is this true? ime yes and among current posters as well.

i am sorry to read that, but i must also say that i post on ilx a lot less than i used to and for long periods of time i stopped posting in part because the seemingly shared culture here was profoundly alienating. i got sick of trying to be cool about that and just dropped out. perhaps this is the inevitable reaction to an earlier period of ilx culture where other posters than the ones that currently feel unable to post felt unable to post.

since i started posting here over a decade ago, with some deviation, ilx has always been at the forefront of current progressive conventional wisdom and [look i'm going to apologize for using this term and the very fact that i need to contextualize/disassociate myself from this term should be telling i think] political correctness. for a v brief period it seemed like that might've blown over (esp in the wake of the election when socialists were trying to emphasize shared class goals over particularistic identity-based appeals) but now, partly bc of our President's own interests, we're right in the throes of the culture wars. and it's fine. communities /should/ be allowed to determine what opinions are within their particular Overton window and chase off opinions that they don't like. it just seems weird to me to be offended by treesh's marginalized opinion when probably like 99% of ilxors who currently post would back you up that an artists' personal life should be determinative in our evaluation of their work.

okay. perhaps it was weird of me.

(nb i'm not saying you're weird please don't take anything i'm writing personally. i'm just saying that it's strange to me that we have such different views of the current climate)

fwiw i've enjoyed chatting with you over the years i think you're smart and reasonable and inquisitive and thoughtful

can't you see you're in love with each other??!?!?!?

i didn't take it personally! i guess...i feel like some of your experience of the world and ilx over the past ten years jibes with mine and some seems somewhat different.

i also have enjoyed chatting with you!

hahaha xp

if ilx were a romantic comedy Mordy and i would have to get married. he's also Jewish and i'm Muslim iirc.

It’s like social media Romeo and Juliet

i was irritated by treeship posting that he doesn't read literature for moral instruction because it smacked of attitudes of "i can loftily separate art from the artist because i better understand what literature is than these simpletons who can't."

i'm sorry, i didn't mean it like that. there are writers i can't read for personal, emotional reasons. like, i actually have never read william s burroughs because he shot his wife. the fact that i make exceptions for other writers is totally inconsistent but i'm not claiming to be consistent.

my attitude toward literature is sentimental. i do think that works contain a part of the person who created them; the fact that they are things made by people is why they are relevant to us. if i'm pushing against anything it's the idea that there are people who are "totally bad" and that, because of this, they can't have written books that could be relevant or instructive to "good people." i don't think you were making a version of that argument. i think it's implicit in some of the attitudes expressed on ilx and in similar corners of the internet though. the term "garbage person" is popular.

no, don't be sorry; i'm pretty sure i over-read what you wrote and projected some shit irl men have said to me over the years onto you.

"garbage person" and "trash" to refer to people bother me a lot in terms of their ubiquity on social media, too. unless the garbage person is donald trump, because that seems true.

yeah trump does seem uniquely worthless

its just a fucking book christ

Sorry I just woke up

thought I recognised the shrill tone of the recently woke

Goddamit ten secs earlier and I could've been in first with a worse joke

Wins for the win

Discussions so much better with horseshoe and it's a bad thing if you don't enjoy them on ilx anymore and if I'm anything to do with that I'm genuinely sorry btw. Never not a great poster.

otm

yeah horseshoe's posts here have been great

oh no! i am sorry; i did not mean to fire shots! if anything ilx seems kinder and mellower than it ever did when i used to post constantly! i think what i'm describing is a change in me where i no longer feel it necessary to inhabit predominantly male spaces to prove to myself that i am cool? i have given up on being cool. also i am old and sleep a lot more.

darragh you are a delight and i hope you are thriving, on ilx and off.

(also to prove to anonymous men that i am cool? the fact that i used to feel it necessary to do this does not reflect partic well on me, i think, and has little to do with the anonymous men themselves.)

Phew *exhales*

many xxxps but lol wins. horseshoe i enjoy your posts. convo itt has been good. my crankiness was not directed at anyone in particular, apologies everyone. i wasn't yet woke enough

seems to me whether or not tao lin was good was a central part of the question here & the rhetorical trap treesh falls into is not acknowledging (until a recent post) that looking at TL's writing through different lenses can completely shift how people interpret him

a lot of the language used to describe him from proponents has been some borderline voice-of-a-generation objective long view 'he is important' stuff that does not jibe i think w/ good crit in 2017 (nb I am guilty of doing this stuff to, 'i learned it from watching you' etc) but I think its important for people in this moment not to cut off all "bad culture" (i'm not sure a single person in this thread was even advocating for this, contra mordy) but to reassess *how they discuss their attraction to / repulsion to cultural objects* rhetorically, to make their arguments through a lens of personal, subjective experience *through* their intuited objective readings of what the piece of art does or doesnt do.

im not saying this was something people didnt know already or werent already doing, but a lot of the 'conflict' in these conversations seems to come down not to two groups standing on one side of 'condemn bad artists' or 'sepearate art from artist' but to *slippage* in the rhetoric about the art where they lean objective/universal when they are describing a personal & subjective attraction/repulsion to the art

i mean 'good crit' not in the professional sense, more in the critical thinking/useful contribution sense

and of course they can describe *their own sense* of art's importance, but its important to foreground that it is their own experience

there is something objective/universal in claiming "the most promising young american author is TAO LIN"
is he really the only candidate?

One of my first impressions of the guy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjcOK2T0lPo

yeah that was one of the first things i saw, i think about this youtube comment often:

Clearly there is no substance to the prose (unless if you wanna get into absurdity and existentialism) but it's most likely that what tao lin (troll lin) is trying to achieve here is reveal the way people force meaning out of nothing (especially in the field of high art). watch the audience go from amused to contemplative to uncomfortable to annoyed then finally relieved and in a state of understanding- as if there was something to be understood. they weren't watching art- they were the art. 

youtube commenter ridiculously otm? it's a strange land

I mean didn’t Beckett do all that too

yea but he didnt have a video camera

there is something objective/universal in claiming "the most promising young american author is TAO LIN"
is he really the only candidate?

― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, November 29, 2017 5:12 PM (forty-two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i made this thread over 4 years ago, i stand by the title, many threads on ilx are hyperbolic declarative statements like that

yeah we can't be taking a microscope to thread titles around here

I HATE GARRISON KEILLOR

i think the times have changed where the thread title seems absurd in retrospect even if you think he's still doing something interesting

"ilx always embraces hyperbole" is not an endorsement of the sentiment

i get it, when you love something an artist is doing the extent to which he's marginalized or isn't feels to some extent like a referendum on yourself ! its important to be honest w yourself about *why* you like it, this is where your argument for his importance has meaning

^super otm, excellent points.

i get it, when you love something an artist is doing the extent to which he's marginalized or isn't feels to some extent like a referendum on yourself ! its important to be honest w yourself about *why* you like it, this is where your argument for his importance has meaning

you're absolutely right. thread title has aged out, just personally i don't believe it's even close to being true anymore, he hasn't published a novel since Taipei and he hasn't even published anything since Selected Tweets with Mira Gonzalez two and a half years ago. i wouldn't argue for his cultural importance anymore- i think he hit a vein with Taipei, and the book endures for me because it captures 21st century alienation and isolation in a very specific way, it felt very topical, and it has probably a dozen paragraphs and sentences i still think about (mostly the "sarcastically framing nothing"). im all for mods changing it to whatever... "TAO LIN: author?"

if it sounds like im giving the pro- side too much credit in trying to sound 'reasonable,' i hope its clear i sympathize more w/ horseshoe's position than mordy's here. in my opinion he was never that interesting although his craft was v well honed by tapai, i just didnt enjoy reading it; to be totally transparent about what i think, i'd have to think more deeply than i want to about tao lin, but in an attention economy, i have no reason to do so. if his proponents want to give him all this cultural capital that he seemed to once have, to give his work the *urgency* of this thread title, they'll have to do it without ignoring a culture shaped around books ignored or denied an existence for their rhetoric to be effective