4 ms·
Sure. 1)The writing is very bad (which is ironic because she got mad at Houellebecq for being a racist and said that he is translated a lot because he writes l
by mamonster 1y ago
Sure.
1)The writing is very bad (which is ironic because she got mad at Houellebecq for being a racist and said that he is translated a lot because he writes like shit so easy to translate). You take an average page of Ernaux (in French) and it's just not very... sophisticated at all, but then all the critics that like her say that this language "unmasks" the reality and is the perfect medium for "autofiction".
2)Her initial ascension has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of her writing(which is very bad), but rather with her "social" message. Her entire work is basically about how she is from a working class family background which is very horrible and sexist, and going to school and university is how she escaped this horrible environment(domineering dad, "rape" that's not really rape, abortions, etc.) . She is basically "anti-beauf" and that's all.
To summarize, I would say that she is like the left-wing analogue of Houellebecq, except that Houellebecq (rightfully) doesn't win the Nobel Prize for shitty writing. I'm certainly elitist a bit of a "reactionary", but for Ernaux its so flagrant that what got rewarded was the political message and not the quality of the writing.
- greenie_beans 1y agore #2, this is part of culture whether you agree with it or not. just because you don't like her politics doesn't mean she's not influential. sounds like your beef is with what was trending in the marketplace of ideas at that time and you would never be happy if any left wing writer was chosen. don't worry, a reactionary will get their time soon enough again. last night, actually, my thought was: i bet it's gonna be a conservative (given the current political climate and how ironically "conservatism" is trendy as "avant-garde" despite the oxymoron in how conservative ideas are some of the most basic and mainstream ideas in the world)
- mamonster 1y agoIt's not an issue of her being left wing, it's an issue of her being nominated for the Nobel Prize of Literature despite being horrible at writing(as in the actual technical skill of writing). As for reactionaries/conservatives winning, it's basically impossible for someone to win this award as a genuine "reactionary". The last genuine reactionary who won it was Solzhenitsyn, and it would never be awarded to him if they were aware of all of his views.
- greenie_beans 1y agoit's been a while since i've read ernaux but i can't remember hating her writing like that. but this exchange does remind me how french literature snobs are the worst. les immortels lol. coming from somebody who has never heard of krasznahorkai, no less!