Dave Eggers returns

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (114 of them)
I'd hate to think how much good writing we'd lose if we had to dimiss it on the basis the author was a complete asshole.

otm. And yet, Eggers does have a self-importance about him that turns a lot of people (even and especially people who know him personally) right th' fuck off.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 02:37 (seventeen years ago) link

I still might buy this book, though.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 02:38 (seventeen years ago) link

I have no idea whether or not Eggers is an asshole - all I know is that he writes like a pompous asshole, and that inevitably colors his work (and the reception of it).

I don't think I made it to this wallet incident in the first book. I think I gave up within a couple of chapters of him taking his brother in. Ugh.

milo (milo), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 02:51 (seventeen years ago) link

all I know is that he writes like a pompous asshole

Yeah, that's what I meant. People who know him report even worse.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 02:55 (seventeen years ago) link

Some Catholic, quick: find me a quote on doing good works without humility.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:00 (seventeen years ago) link

This is the best I can find:

The poor man, rich in faith, who
toils for the love of God and is generous of the little fruit of his
labors, is much nearer to heaven than the rich man who spends a fortune in
good works from no higher motive than his natural inclination to
benevolence.

-from "The Groundwork of the Christian Virtues"
by Archbishop Ullathorne
1945

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:08 (seventeen years ago) link

But that doesn't really work. The problemis that we suspect that Eggers is doing good deeds to make up for the fact that deep down, he knows he's a bit of a prick.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:09 (seventeen years ago) link

mcsweeney's has published a lot of rubbish books (probably) but they also published this

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/1932416609.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V41400631_.jpg

which is the best novel I've read in years

akm (akmonday), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:10 (seventeen years ago) link

why is that a problem as a reader of literature?

(xp)

hank s1ockli (hanks1ockli), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Well, his literature has its own special problems. But he's more than a writer -- he's a personality in the publishing industry, and not one that everyone respects.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:22 (seventeen years ago) link

Possibly because of his ashtray personality.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:24 (seventeen years ago) link

yeah but just to circle back to the main point, should the level of respect a writer garners in the publishing industry really affect your opinion of his books?

hank s1ockli (hanks1ockli), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:32 (seventeen years ago) link

Depends. How many of the regular readers of Eggers are also aware of his other public endeavors? A lot, I would guess. So what's getting books into hands? Why are we still reading?

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:38 (seventeen years ago) link

sure, sure. his personality and various antics keep him in the public eye, i guess... but people aren't reading his books because they think he's a nice guy.

hank s1ockli (hanks1ockli), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:50 (seventeen years ago) link

BUT I THINK MAYBE THEY ARE. Because his writing by itself wouldn't do it. He's his own publicity machine. That's the genius and the tragedy.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 03:52 (seventeen years ago) link

you think people read his books because they think he is nice? and because people think that, the fact that you think he is not nice thus affects your own opinion of his books?

hank s1ockli (hanks1ockli), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 04:22 (seventeen years ago) link

You think I don't read the books because I don't like him as a person?

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 04:24 (seventeen years ago) link

i'm confused

akm (akmonday), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 04:39 (seventeen years ago) link

Apparently Dave Eggers hates everyone.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 04:50 (seventeen years ago) link

you think people read his books because they think he is nice? and because people think that, the fact that you think he is not nice thus affects your own opinion of his books?

No, no. I think people read his books because they think he's a good writer. I personally think they're wrong. But hey, who am I? (If that's what we're really arguing.)

Meanwhile, his press and self-made publicity has turned him into something he is by many accounts not -- a nice guy, a great philanthropist, a kind of person to attach your undying fandom to.

You think I don't read the books because I don't like him as a person?

No, dude, I'm on your side. I think you don't read the books because he's just not that good.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 05:29 (seventeen years ago) link

But I have to say one more time, this new book sounds really interesting.

whoop de doodle (kenan), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 05:32 (seventeen years ago) link

But that doesn't really work. The problemis that we suspect that Eggers is doing good deeds to make up for the fact that deep down, he knows he's a bit of a prick.

Which is fine as long he sticks to doing so within his own sphere of endeavour: writing. When he joins forces with Bono, then I will have a major problem with him.

accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 08:16 (seventeen years ago) link

i read that as "when he joins forces with a Bonobo"

akm (akmonday), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 09:10 (seventeen years ago) link

Eggers = Wanker

Modal Fugue (Modal Fugue), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 09:47 (seventeen years ago) link

A Staggering Work of Well-intentioned, Sincere Genius, No Really, Guys, Seriously!

r.dot, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 12:45 (seventeen years ago) link

who knows, maybe it's a decent book...

r.dot, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 12:49 (seventeen years ago) link

no pomo

r.cummings, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 12:51 (seventeen years ago) link

Excerpt here:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,1546275,00.html

His prose style is pretty awkward and amateurish when you strip away the schtick:

He first pushes the coffee table closer to the entertainment center, reducing the space between the three objects: me, the table, and the shelving. Now he drags a chair from the kitchen. He places this near my head. From the couch he brings one of the three large cushions that sit upright. He stands the cushion up against the seat of the chair. Bringing another chair from the kitchen, he places it, with a couch cushion soon resting against it, at my feet. He has effectively eliminated me from his view. My view is now limited to the ceiling above me, and the little I can see between the windows of the coffee table. I lie, finding myself impressed with his architectural vision, until he surprises me with the blanket. The bedspread from my room is carefully spread over the couch cushions until it forms a tent over me, and this is too much. Michael, I have little patience left for you. I am finished with you, and wish you could have seen what I saw. Be grateful, TV Boy. Have respect. Have you seen the beginning of a war? Picture your neighborhood, and now see the women screaming, the babies tossed into wells. Watch your brothers explode. I want you there with me.

Ugh.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 14:13 (seventeen years ago) link

Not seeing where the schtick is in that paragraph?

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 17:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah that is basically one of the worst paragraphs I have ever read.

cws, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:00 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost - That's my point - Eggers sans schtick = paragraph upon paragraph that should never see print. It's as though he labored intensively to obstruct any potential flow and obscure any clarity of description all while using mostly one and two syllable words and probably thinking his writing to be "spare" and "direct."

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:09 (seventeen years ago) link

Oh okay, gotcha. I think the paragraph does flow pretty well and it is fairly clear. This paragraph a little further down on the page is better I think:

Through the doorway I saw a kind of airplane, coming low over the village. It was a fascinating kind of plane, black everywhere and dull, unreflective. The planes I had seen before resembled birds in a rudimentary way, with noses and wings and chests, but this machine looked like nothing so much as a cricket. I watched it as it flew over the village. The sound was rich and black, louder than anything I had ever known, the vibrations shaking my ribs, pulling me apart.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:17 (seventeen years ago) link

I agree that that's a much better paragraph, but there are still a couple of wincers in there for me - 1) "in a rudimentary way" 2) "pulling me apart"

He has the capacity to write well but he always seems in need of a better editor.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:21 (seventeen years ago) link

He has the capacity to write well but he always seems in need of a better editor.

Yeah. This is my biggest problem with him. He like, re-released YSKOV with a new title and 50 extra pages or something and called it Sacrament? Dude, get thee to a fuckin editor.

jaymc, you should submit that to McSweeneys' Convergences Contest.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:25 (seventeen years ago) link

it might be the same designer. I'll check at home

akm (akmonday), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:35 (seventeen years ago) link

I'm going to guess no - I think I remember seeing other stuff with that woodcut print look around the same time.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:37 (seventeen years ago) link

Is there really a contest?? I LUV U LAWRENCE WESCHLER!

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:37 (seventeen years ago) link

around the same time

You mean within the last four months?

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:38 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/books/everythingthatrises.contest.html

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:41 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost Haha, did The Eraser come out that recently? How quickly I forget.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:42 (seventeen years ago) link

The problem with all this stuff (which is different than the general problems with Eggers' leaden prose) is that it can't find the right voice -- at once it wants to be literary and faux naif and also convey the hidden truths refracted through speaking in a second tongue and also be firm and workmanlike hemmingway unflinching. So there's a special mess going on. Why "a kind of" airplane? How can a voice that says coming low over the village" also say "like nothing so much as a" (which is by the way a terrible empty phrase) and then simply say "I watched as it flew over the village."? If he's watching, why is the next sentence about the sound!? What does it mean for a sound to be "black"? Why "I had ever known" instead of "I knew"? Maybe there is a black sort of sound, but is it a vibrating sound? A vibrating sound would be orange, maybe.

How about this para:
But it was strange. Adults were running from the machines, falling, screaming. I looked at the people running, though I was too dazed to move. The volume of the machines held me still. I felt tired in some new way, as I watched mothers grab their young sons and bring them back into their huts. I watched men run into the high grass and throw themselves to the ground. I watched as one of the crickets flew over the soccer field, flying lower than the other machines; I watched as the twenty young men playing on the field ran toward the school, screaming. Then a new sound pumped through the air. It was like the cutting and dividing of the machine, but it was not that.

Why is there the semicolon that late in the game? I assume its to accelerate the rhythm, but it just sticks out. Why did they run "toward the school, screaming" instead of saying they "ran, screaming, toward the school". Why does he need to keep mentioning he watched. Why can't the parallelism just be with "as" or even better yet, fade away. How does a sound pump through the air? Like a sump pump? Things don't even pump themselves through anything! They need to pump something else? What exactly is it that the sound is pumping through the air then?

The last sentence of the preceding para is: "I saw other boys in the village staring up as I was, some of them jumping, laughing and pointing to the crickets with the chopping sound." So where's the "it" that was strange? There is not "it" -- just more filler. He already established that it was an airplane that looked like a cricket -- the character doesn't need to keep calling it a cricket, either -- that's what people do when they don't know what it is, not when they just are reminded of something else. If he was staring up, then how did he see the other boys, by the way? Wouldn't they have been, y'know, level? Did the crickets have the chopping sound or the boys? Just the jumping ones, or all the ones?

Ok, enough, you see the problem here.

sterlclover, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:45 (seventeen years ago) link

Have you guys read the new "controversy" re: Egger's intro to the anniversary edition of Infinite Jest? Now, it's a whole mountain out of a molehill considering it is conceivable a person might change their mind about a book, movie, album, or anything over the span of ten years, but basically Eggers is getting some obscene amount of flak thanks to the fact that the intro is, as intros usually are, a lavish blow job offered to David Foster Wallace, whereas Eggers' reviews of the book were all pretty close to complete savagings of DFW's writing style.

It's just kind of funny. I mean, I think the dude is a douchebag and a terrible writer, but I solve this by not reading his stuff anymore, but there are just some people who HATE him and look for any reason to start a Eggers jihad.

Allyzay knows where the interfacing goes., Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:47 (seventeen years ago) link

The point being, he's shooting for plenty of effects, and falling terribly short. It feels like a bad movie script. There's empty language and imprecise language all over the place and he tries to justify it as somehow in the "real" voice of the character, except then the character comes busting loose with something like "finding myself impressed with his architectural vision" and you know that the voice is hopeless anyway.

So also it feels like an American actor slipping in and out of a poor, say, Scottish accent.

sterlclover, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:49 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost, ally links plz!

sterlclover, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:50 (seventeen years ago) link

He already established that it was an airplane that looked like a cricket -- the character doesn't need to keep calling it a cricket, either -- that's what people do when they don't know what it is, not when they just are reminded of something else.


I think it's an effective use of the parallel, it's a poetic image.
Other than that, yeah I agree with everything you said just about. Except for the pumping. And I think the "it" refers to the situation.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:52 (seventeen years ago) link

Go here and scroll down a ways sclover

http://rakesprogress.typepad.com/

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:53 (seventeen years ago) link

the anniversary edition of Infinite Jest

These words actually cause me more pain than anything else on the thread. (Not because of 'oh how the time has gone' nonsense but because the concept is annoying.)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:53 (seventeen years ago) link

Eggers jihad, you're right Ally. People hate that dude. He should just write his books and not do any press at all. No matter what he does, he'll step in shit. I think people can change their minds about books, and that's cool. But Eggers gets nailed to the cross because of who he is. The new intro is a total blow job, but deservedly so.

xpost: Seriously? Infinite Jest is mind blowingly awesome and I will buy you a copy for you to read, if you will agree to try to read it.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:56 (seventeen years ago) link

The concept of the 'anniversary edition' for something so recent, not the book itself, which I found for a buck years back and has been sitting patiently on my shelf since then. What did the publishers do, digitally remaster it with extra tracks?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 21:57 (seventeen years ago) link

x-post -- You have to use footnotes there. It's required by law.

Ned Raggett is doing a little practice firing at the clouds (Ned), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:23 (seventeen years ago) link

The problem is that they're not even footnotes most of the time: they're endnotes. Nicholson Baker's The Mezzanine is like half composed of footnotes, but they're easy to digest because they're on the same page as the regular text. No flipping.

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:23 (seventeen years ago) link

(Also: Baker's novella was written in like 1989 or something, and everyone acts like DFW invented footnotes seven years later.)

jaymc (jaymc), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:24 (seventeen years ago) link

The footnotes get fun after awhile. I had two bookmarks, one for my footnotes, one for the book. Keep in mind that DFW would probably be the first to admit that he is a rat bastard for using all those footnotes--he's intentionally manipulating you and probably cackling as he does. And seriously, possibly one of the funniest books ever.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:24 (seventeen years ago) link

my university library does not have a copy of Infinite Jest.


waht

grbchv! (gbx), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Interlibrary Loan to the rescue.

xpost- As for footnotes, the Filmography of James O. Incandenza is the best thing ever.

molly (molly d), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:26 (seventeen years ago) link

DUDE Molly yes. The Canadian spy sections are THE WORST. Apparently he wrote them last? He should have cut them.

yeah jaymc, I hear you. Poor Nicholson Baker.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:26 (seventeen years ago) link

Interlibrary Loan to the rescue.

I was going to say. (The desk is right behind me to the left.)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:28 (seventeen years ago) link

Molly once again I can't agree with you more. The filmography is the greatest thing EVER.

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:28 (seventeen years ago) link

DFW is a masterful writer whom some consider to be fatally flawed. But Eggers is just a hack.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:34 (seventeen years ago) link

JACKPOT

I read somewhere that John Krasinski (Jim from The Office) is trying to put out a film version of Brief Interviews with Hideous Men.

molly (molly d), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:34 (seventeen years ago) link

Fun with Teeth!

Mr. Que, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:51 (seventeen years ago) link

Poultry in Motion!

molly (molly d), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:54 (seventeen years ago) link

These are all band names waiting to happen.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:55 (seventeen years ago) link

test

jed_, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 23:28 (seventeen years ago) link

sterlclover, of course it's your right to read anyway you choose, but I can't help but think that going through a book worrying about things like Why did they run "toward the school, screaming" instead of saying they "ran, screaming, toward the school". really has to ruin the reading experience.

In everyday conversation,I could say "She walked confidently down the street", "Confidently, she walked down the street", or "She walked down the street confidently". I'm sure one of those is more gramatically proper than another, but in the end, they all get the meaning across, they each have different rhythms that might sound more attractive at the moment of writing or saying it, so who cares?

It's like listening to music for notes that are out of the key instead of just letting yourself feel the emotion of it.

Zachary Scott, Wednesday, 29 November 2006 23:35 (seventeen years ago) link

Keep in mind that DFW would probably be the first to admit that he is a rat bastard for using all those footnotes--he's intentionally manipulating you and probably cackling as he does.

Reeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaallly? How deliciously perverse! (Sort of an essential part of the turn-off, personally.)

literalisp, Thursday, 30 November 2006 01:28 (seventeen years ago) link

Ahahah, if we needed to reprint INFINITE JEST, we would just do that. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper than a whole new jacket and increased page count, that's for fuckin' sure.

Laurel (Laurel), Thursday, 30 November 2006 01:45 (seventeen years ago) link

"She walked confidently down the street", "Confidently, she walked down the street", or "She walked down the street confidently". I'm sure one of those is more gramatically proper than another

they all suck with the word 'confidently' in there

jergins (jergins), Thursday, 30 November 2006 02:02 (seventeen years ago) link

It's like listening to music for notes that are out of the key instead of just letting yourself feel the emotion of it.

Yeah, but out of key notes jump out at you, and so does bad writing. That's the whole point.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 30 November 2006 02:30 (seventeen years ago) link

even back when little sterl read ij right when it came out i was somewhat dubious about its reread value even tho there were, as i recall, some very well executed passages. haven't followed his work since as much as i should. the essays i found for the most part pretty irritating in a sort of making-things-more-complicated-than-necessary way with the exception of the lynch one, which was v. sharp.

ij, the thing is, always felt as sprawly and adolescent as its main character, and i guess read as a book being about that its pretty good, but when ppl. try to read more into it is when i go batty and get more turned off dfw qua dfw than i should.

always liked that "westward path of the empire" short story tho, as well as some of the other material in "girl with the curious hair."

now onto the thing about eggers putting adverbs at the end of sentences, repeatedly, delimited by a comma. doing so adds finality, firmly. it's as though the thought is complete and then as a coda, there's the afterthought, dangling. doing so interrupts the flow in the middle of paragraphs, jarringly, pointlessly. also, it implies that the closing adverb isn't central to the thought which isn't the case in the screaming sentence, irritatingly.

sterlclover, Thursday, 30 November 2006 03:36 (seventeen years ago) link

It sounds like trash-novel writing, verily.

Hurting (A-Ron Hubbard), Thursday, 30 November 2006 03:39 (seventeen years ago) link

ok i note sometimes its the adverb and sometimes an adjective or even a clause, clarifying.

sterlclover, Thursday, 30 November 2006 03:41 (seventeen years ago) link

there are no design credits on "the children's hospital" so I don't know if stanley donwood did it or not.

akm (akmonday), Thursday, 30 November 2006 03:54 (seventeen years ago) link

it would be nice if it turned out the children from the hospital did it.

hank s1ockli (hanks1ockli), Thursday, 30 November 2006 04:29 (seventeen years ago) link

"(Am I the only one to have read all the books in the Canopus in Argos series?)"

maria has. like ten times. but she's a freak. she tried to get me to read them and i looked at her like she was made out of the funny papers.

scott seward (121212), Thursday, 30 November 2006 04:36 (seventeen years ago) link

:-D

Ten times, I'm impressed. There are passages I still remember from when I read them as a teen.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 30 November 2006 04:37 (seventeen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.