the most promising young american author is TAO LIN

guys, what if—and I know this sounds crazy—but what if old Gawker Media posts aren't actually the best information source for making moral judgments about people's personal lives?

i was led to believe by information sources on the internet that you don't actually have to choose the best information source to make important judgments about anything, historical events, public health policy, whatever

guys, what if—and I know this sounds crazy—but what if old Gawker Media posts aren't actually the best information source for making moral judgments about people's personal lives?

― it me, Monday, November 27, 2017 1:21 PM (twenty-two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

weird hill to die on.

his ex made him sound like a real POS abuser. the gawker article quoted her posts.

once again I've died on a hill

guys, what if—and I know this sounds crazy—but what if old Gawker Media posts aren't actually the best information source for making moral judgments about people's personal lives?

― it me, Monday, November 27, 2017 3:21 PM (thirteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

how fast did ilx go from 'gawker is stupid for running speculation' to 'gawker's correct speculation doesn't have to be the only thing we listen to'

iirc the jezebel post is all scenes straight out of his (transparently autobiographical) novel Richard Yates. at the time alt-lit types who had lauded the book had to act shocked SHOCKED that he was capable of such monstrous behaviour

Gawker didn't "speculate." They amplified a series of out-of-context tweets that the author later deleted and tried to have removed. Neither Tao nor Kennedy felt that Gawker's representation of events was accurate, and both asked that the article be taken down. But Gawker had a long-standing vendetta against Lin—one that predated his literary celebrity—and an institutional mandate to drive traffic.

So guess what happened?

so kennedy retracted all of this? if so then fine. I'm just saying: this is an odd reversal given ILX's general reaction to every other man accused of doing similar things.

yeah, well, I'm not actually wearing a shirt that says "Official ILX Opinion-Holder" right now

yeah i guess it would be if Kennedy didn't retract their statements

His book, Richard Yates, makes him sound like a real POS abuser. He gave interviews at the time suggesting it was autobiographical, and anyone who read it could see that was true. The book itself is primarily about a Tao Lin surrogate abusing an E.L. Kennedy surrogate.

Also, treeship, Taipei is not good. Lin has tin ears, and chunky clauses strung together like language legos does little to hide this. More importantly, he is not an elephant art kind of guy. Richard Yates works because it's so unimaginative and literal. It's like a word polaroid. Factual, artless, private.

Also, treeship, Taipei is not good.

has everyone in this thread turned into turrican with these declarative objective statements about the quality & merit of a piece of art

weirdly fine with this version of it

declarative statements about a piece of art prob constitutes 90 percent of ilx

what is elephant art

lest we forget the objective merits of the angry birds movie

What is your point? it's obvious you don't like his writing, this is just a thing of "if it works for you, it's insightful; if it doesn't, it's transparent horseshit."

Starting a reply with "What is your point?" on an internet message board seems a bit strong.

Treeship made the point that, "I still think Taipei is an extraordinary book—an uncompromising document of our cultural moment." For my part, I'm trying to poke for more details here about what others think is significant about the work, and saying "if you don't like it that's fine" isn't useful. Treeship said "part of this had to do with the way he represented the mediated quality of his characters' experiences -- through drugs, technology, etc. it was dystopian fiction in the present," which is perhaps a good place start, and that was the reply I was looking at when I responded, basically, "isn't it just like Kerouac?" which is me trying to dig in a little bit to what is meant to be unique about Taipei (or Tao Lin's fiction more generally).

Always thought it me was a hoos but I guess not?

the people critiquing the book are providing p reasonable and considered criticism, and the people who like taipei are being attacked for liking it obv

I don’t retract anything I said about the book but I kind of hate how closely I’m associated with it now, given who the author is and what he’s done. Defending socipathic behavior is not what I’m about if that wasn’t already clear.

I liked Taipei. I liked its fundamental ambiguity where it was hard to tell what was calculated and what was just naive narration of his own life - I think that's what was interesting, this state of simultaneously reporting the times and being a symptom of the times. He wrote a good book but I'm not sure he's a great writer - maybe more a question of being at the right place at the right time.

I don't have a copy on hand, but IIRC the plot of Richard Yates is this:

The Lin stand-in character, a 22-year-old vegan, is unhappy when his 16-year old girlfriend gains weight, and advises her to avoid food-court garbage and start eating healthier. This comes alongside his broader disapproval of fat Americans and their unhealthy diets. (Together, the two start calling obese people "cheese beasts.")

The Kennedy stand-in appears to agree with Lin, but instead secretly develops a severe case of bulimia, which she only reveals to him months later in a startling confessional e-mail. Lin realizes he's partly at fault, and that he has been controlling her, and the book ends with an apology.

So... is he the worst human alive? Can this book be read outside of the lens of "rape" and "abuse"? I think it can.

The other question is whether the writing's any good. Certainly Lin's style is different from anyone else's, and this distinction is the result of concentrated effort on Lin's part. He delights, I think, in trolling the guardians of the received wisdom of what constitutes "good prose"—you don't write a phrase like "vaguely liquid-y" without a good understanding of what writing rules you're breaking and which of the grammar mavens trying to offend.

Also, Lin is very funny. Like how Taipei begins with him setting a goal of "calmly organizing things" and ends with him accidentally snorting a double-dose of heroin and falling face down in the street. Or how he's constantly dropping his iPhone on his face. Or how posters always fall on him.

Perhaps now he's trolling the purveyors of establishment wisdom. A theory like 9/11 "dustification" is absurd even to truthers—it could, I guess, be a performative way of permanently placing himself outside of the boundaries of the literary establishment. Then again, maybe he's just done too much acid.

What is your point? it's obvious you don't like his writing, this is just a thing of "if it works for you, it's insightful; if it doesn't, it's transparent horseshit."

Starting a reply with "What is your point?" on an internet message board seems a bit strong.

Treeship made the point that, "I still think Taipei is an extraordinary book—an uncompromising document of our cultural moment." For my part, I'm trying to poke for more details here about what others think is significant about the work, and saying "if you don't like it that's fine" isn't useful. Treeship said "part of this had to do with the way he represented the mediated quality of his characters' experiences -- through drugs, technology, etc. it was dystopian fiction in the present," which is perhaps a good place start, and that was the reply I was looking at when I responded, basically, "isn't it just like Kerouac?" which is me trying to dig in a little bit to what is meant to be unique about Taipei (or Tao Lin's fiction more generally).

― fields of salmon, Monday, November 27, 2017 5:42 PM (thirty-two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

fair enough, you're right. sorry for being prickly.

declarative statements about a piece of art prob constitutes 90 percent of ilx

― ToddBonzalez (BradNelson), Monday, November 27, 2017 5:38 PM (thirty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

there's a difference between discussing stuff and working through opinions and openly communicating and the stone wall of "no, bad, you're wrong" or choosing to remain aloof and not engage in a conversation in good faith

lest we forget the objective merits of the angry birds movie

― ToddBonzalez (BradNelson), Monday, November 27, 2017 5:40 PM (thirty-four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

iirc i just liked it a lot and made my case, i totally understand & can accept if something i like isn't someone else's jam

and yea i feel you treeship, i love Taipei but am not into hrmrm dying on a hill defending tao lin, documented shit head & possible charlatan. & i haven't read Richard Yates

His royal majesty Roger moore

there's a difference between discussing stuff and working through opinions and openly communicating and the stone wall of "no, bad, you're wrong" or choosing to remain aloof and not engage in a conversation in good faith

i don't think either of the latter scenarios are happening ("no, taipei is not good" =/= "no, bad, you're wrong"or bad faith)

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/c5/7c/9c/c57c9c7df8705e626bb4dc2edf225cb2--smiley-dutch-quotes.jpg

dat klonk best slim OTM

klonkadonk

What does that say? I don’t read Italian.

Isn't dril/Trump's presidency "dystopian fiction in the present"? Don't know why you need this book.

Seriously guys.

hey this tao lin is a REAL piece of work, am i right fellas?

talk about a POISON PEN am i right? (he's poisoning children by not getting them vaccines)

this guy's no WALT WHITMAN but his books sure are leaves of ASS. who's with me?

ernest hemingway might have written A FAREWELL TO ARMS but i heard this guy's next book is going to be called A FAREWELL TO DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS THAT TOOK DOWN BUILDING 7. who's with me?

I have a feeling that actually our entire moment is amplifying the personal (with a healthy mix of isn’t that what you heard) to prove taste. Especially when you equate another’s taste with support for bad behavior. It makes sitting at home and doing fuck all about anything all that much sweeter. Personally, I go through my bookshelf and put authors in detention. It’s way too hard to figure out who’s actually a monster, so it makes picking a novel easier. Gotta go pre-internet.

Taipei was honest, he’s got some sweet short stories too. Hope that 1) the guy is mentally ill; or 2) he’s not and the next book sells; or 3) both.

What I meant: Tao Lin isn’t pure, Tao Lin is pure, I think a lot about Tao Lin.

Enthusiasm goes to get tweezered on this board.

*presses follow button* xp

Love is just the stray hairs left behind

this guy's next book is supposedly called BEYOND EXISTENTIALISM but i heard the original title was BEYOND NARCISSISM. who else has the feeling this guy is getting too big for his britches???

too bad there's not a vaccine against BAD WRITING this guy could take.

wow that is just a staggeringly horrible post lion in winter

maybe performative assholism really is l'esprit du jour

Lion in Winter otm

I have a feeling that actually our entire moment is amplifying the personal (with a healthy mix of isn’t that what you heard) to prove taste. Especially when you equate another’s taste with support for bad behavior.

this part of it is right

i don't really understand exactly what's being said in the first sentence, but if means that people's private tastes are being held up to (moral) scrutiny then he's right. and people are scrutinizing their own tastes too, internalizing the gaze of whatever communities they belong to online.

i don't think anyone here has equated people's tastes with support for bad behavior. but some people here -- me -- have expressed concern that this would happen. when people consume art and media now they do so "in public" to a degree. who knows if this is good or bad

https://static-content.springer.com/cover/book/978-1-349-09670-1.jpg

In awe of Aero finding such a fitting image in a language unknown to him (I'da thunk)

i don't really understand exactly what's being said in the first sentence

you quoted it, said it was right, and then said you didn’t understand it.

why are we digging for truths in a post with a sentence where they hope lin is mentally ill

Tbf there’s a lot of stuff that’s right that I don’t understand