Opened a Box

This is heart wenching.

Looked for a book tonight “The Selfish Gene” by Richard Dawkins.

Reason being Cernovich has a video about memes which refers to a chapter of the book. Ironically it is Chapter 11.

And man I just knew I didn’t sell that book.

I guess I looked harder this time then the other times.

So I opened a box and found everything but one I had been searching for since entering the Appendix N pulp revolution discussion.

Check it:

found

Yeah none are pulp or appendix N I know. But at least in my mind, all had a part to play in the discussion I wanted to put out.

Sure it may have been crap. Yet it would have been something and at least even if only marginally better then the “I don’t like Rawles character arcs and therefor it ain’t superversive” or “Is Steven King’s ‘The IT’ pulp?” discussions. Seriously WTF?!

Ask if Action Comics #1 or if Hodgson are Pulp. Now that would be interesting.

Anyway more or less I have written, been written and not-written myself out of pulp revolution.

So discovering these way after past discussions in which they might have relevant is like ash in my mouth. Can hardly remember honestly. What was that point about the Left Hand of Darkness I had in regards to Pulp Revolution? No idea. Can’t go back. That PK Dick book probably had nothing of value I was looking for. I can’t even remember reading it!

Funny enough I have an index card book mark in it on which I wrote:

“Know that all gods, with lordship of all that transpires in the world, are gods of death”

Is that a quote? Did I write that? No idea. Further no idea what i was thinking about in either case. Back of the card I had written Lord of the Rings quotes. Like “a corpse-light, a light that illuminated nothing”, “The sword broke sparkling into many shards” and “fled wailing back to hide in holes and dark lightness places far from hope”

Maybe it is a Tolkien quote. Or I wrote it thinking about Tolkien’s reprieve that his book is about death. Hey people do read this blog and I suspect many if not most are middle earth nerds. What the heck was Tolkien talking about that his book is about death?

The big book at the bottom has friggen everything in it. Beowolf, Chaucer, Shakespeare you name it. I wanted it for Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels. There was some discussion of about the origins of SFF awhile back. Side note here. Swear to god the lady who played the oracle in the matrix looked the spitting image of the professor of the class I got that book for.

That Bayley book “Knights of the Limits” would be classified as New Wave I think. I just remembered how weird those stories were….but don’t actually remember any of the stories!!! I think one is about bees. LULZ.

This was before Appendix N became Pulp revolution. I guess I wanted a reread and see if it was N stuff. N stuff has a Pulp quality. Namely the stories are not finalities like epics or Campbellian stuff are and in their wake after the story is told leave behind whole universes to explore. You know. Places were you set an RPG in.

Hemingway cuz SJWs. Poe and “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” for obvious reasons. Dostoevsky cuz Underground Man which leads to both anti-heroes and pink slime. “I am a sick man…I am a spiteful man. I am an unattractive man. I believe my liver is diseased.” romanticized every crap SF short story writer of the past 20 years about himself.

Harlen is just there. Tempting me to rip and burn.

That is it…

Oh yeah the three Greek tragedies. I don’t know. I guess I wanted to spit in Nietzsche’s eye and his analysis about how erect he gets from tragedy.

Not even kidding by the way:

“In this state one enriches everything out of one’s own fullness: whatever one sees, whatever wills is seen swelled, taut, strong, overloaded with strength. A man in this state transforms things until they mirror his power—until they are reflections of his perfection. This having to transform into perfection is—art.”

There is one book missing. That would be “The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay”

Michael Chabon really does a job on heroes in that one. Hell I want to say he takes it right out of Nietzsche’s boner inducing “tragedy is art” spiel. I wanted to rip and burn that as well. But yeah i am more then positive I did sell that one.

And that That is it.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Opened a Box”

  1. Tolkien and Death? Might have been a reference to the Passing of the Elves from Middle Earth, the Passing of the Company of the Ring and the Passing of Aragorn and Arwen. In short, how everything is temporary and must eventually die or pass away.

    Other than that, beats me.

    Cool, you got Volume 1 of Poe’s works.

    Never got into Hemingway, though.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “Never got into Hemingway, though.”

      Good. Everything I have read of his is miserable.

      But he did trigger a post modern lit professor I once had. So I guess that is good.

      Like

  2. Sure it may have been crap. Yet it would have been something and at least even if only marginally better then the “I don’t like Rawles character arcs and therefor it ain’t superversive”

    Sure, I didn’t say that, and sure, I wrote several articles on the subject, and sure, I did multiple detailed analyses, and sure, I responded to criticisms directly, but that’s still a totally accurate summary of something I never wrote or said.

    What I *actually said* was – multiple times – that the biggest problem with Rawle’s story was that his characters had no motivations beyond “survive”, and didn’t act like real people, which necessarily meant I had no reason to care about them or anything they did. There was, in fact, a solution staring him directly in the face that was *also* very superversive, but Rawle didn’t take it and the story was far weaker for it.

    I was criticized for this, and responded, and then confusion was expressed over how Rawle’s story didn’t fit the concept of superversive, so I wrote a detailed compare and contrast using the criteria previously laid out on the site.

    And what you got as a summary from all of that was that the book wasn’t superversive because I didn’t like Rawle’s character arcs?!?!

    I mean holy crap. You pulp rev guys jumped all over me for supposedly misrepresenting you when even now you’re saying ridiculous crap like this. Come on, dude.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s