Now I have to go back and listen to all of your articles on writing. When I was a literature major, the critical theory lens was becoming the primary way we were instructed to analyze literature.
My kids are in school and every essay they write must be deconstructed through either a Marxist, Queer or Gender lens. My kids are not getting any other kind of instruction on writing and what makes for interesting writing … just told that all white male cannon authors (when they actually read them) were somehow queer and the papers they write are in class conflict and Marxist theory.
This is what I want. I will listen to your essays on writing and make sure they are able to think about writing in a better and more productive way.
One of the few metafiction works that I really liked was Thomas Ligotti's short story "Notes on the Writing of Horror: A Story" found in his collection "Songs of a Dead Dreamer and Grimscribe" (https://a.co/d/3MA9oSX). It breaks the fourth wall but in a subtle way that crescendos into something incredible. What starts as an apparent lecture on various elements that might be included in a horror story suddenly blend and confuse into an entirely different tale from the narrator. I'm sure you'll love it and is well worth the price of the entire collection, which is excellent and has the creepiest short story I have ever read "The Frolic."
In general, I do not like metafiction and find that it makes the enjoyment of art too cerebral and clinical. I'll never forgive the cartoon commentator Scott McCloud for ruining the majesty of comics for me as a teenager by his heavy-handed metafiction of "Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art" (https://a.co/d/gklW7Bp). Absolutely pretentious with his self-insert and makes the comic book reading experience into an overly conscious chore rather than the smooth process that comes naturally to youth. Reading Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" will always be cherished for me as I read it before McCloud ruined the mystic of the medium by making everything so objective.
Frank Miller was unironically formative in my early worldview before I even knew anything about politics. His gritty, crime-infested Gotham rang true to my adolescent self and justified the need for a tough, militant Batman. The villains were evil, yet the Woke types and understanding psychiatrists would not stop holding their hands and asking about their feelings. He even came up with the "spiteful mutant" archetypes in The Dark Knight Returns volume with the Mutant Gang of the Gotham City Dump. I must have read the leather-bound anthology at least five times.
Yet, at the same time, Miller's aesthetics unfortunately birthed the overly violent and gore that is rampant in the comic book industry. While Miller's hyper violence made sense in his society gone mad mythos, contemporary comic book illustrators just add gross violence everywhere. It's very hard to find books that don't go for the over-the-top blood and guts without any real meaning.
Yeah great pioneers revolutionize genres and then later the rest of their peers imitate the most superficial aspects of their aesthetic without understanding the deeper meaning behind it.
Another great piece. People spend thousands to get this kind of education
Thanks bro, always love you.
Now I have to go back and listen to all of your articles on writing. When I was a literature major, the critical theory lens was becoming the primary way we were instructed to analyze literature.
My kids are in school and every essay they write must be deconstructed through either a Marxist, Queer or Gender lens. My kids are not getting any other kind of instruction on writing and what makes for interesting writing … just told that all white male cannon authors (when they actually read them) were somehow queer and the papers they write are in class conflict and Marxist theory.
This is what I want. I will listen to your essays on writing and make sure they are able to think about writing in a better and more productive way.
So brilliant. Thank you.
Thanks these are 5 of my most popular articles which you may enjoy:
1.)
https://billionairepsycho.substack.com/p/storytelling-115-wish-fulfillment
2.)
https://billionairepsycho.substack.com/p/some-thoughts-on-alex-garlands-civil
3.)
https://billionairepsycho.substack.com/p/canon-fodder-episode-0-watchmen-with
4.)
https://billionairepsycho.substack.com/p/billionaire-psychos-rules-for-writing
5.)
https://billionairepsycho.substack.com/p/pygmalion-and-the-anime-girl
Thank you again for the kind words of encouragement
I really appreciate it!
I'm very flattered again, much affection and good luck to your children
One of the few metafiction works that I really liked was Thomas Ligotti's short story "Notes on the Writing of Horror: A Story" found in his collection "Songs of a Dead Dreamer and Grimscribe" (https://a.co/d/3MA9oSX). It breaks the fourth wall but in a subtle way that crescendos into something incredible. What starts as an apparent lecture on various elements that might be included in a horror story suddenly blend and confuse into an entirely different tale from the narrator. I'm sure you'll love it and is well worth the price of the entire collection, which is excellent and has the creepiest short story I have ever read "The Frolic."
In general, I do not like metafiction and find that it makes the enjoyment of art too cerebral and clinical. I'll never forgive the cartoon commentator Scott McCloud for ruining the majesty of comics for me as a teenager by his heavy-handed metafiction of "Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art" (https://a.co/d/gklW7Bp). Absolutely pretentious with his self-insert and makes the comic book reading experience into an overly conscious chore rather than the smooth process that comes naturally to youth. Reading Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" will always be cherished for me as I read it before McCloud ruined the mystic of the medium by making everything so objective.
Excellent! Very exciting works for me to check out. Yes I love Frank Miller's Batman comics.
Frank Miller was unironically formative in my early worldview before I even knew anything about politics. His gritty, crime-infested Gotham rang true to my adolescent self and justified the need for a tough, militant Batman. The villains were evil, yet the Woke types and understanding psychiatrists would not stop holding their hands and asking about their feelings. He even came up with the "spiteful mutant" archetypes in The Dark Knight Returns volume with the Mutant Gang of the Gotham City Dump. I must have read the leather-bound anthology at least five times.
Yet, at the same time, Miller's aesthetics unfortunately birthed the overly violent and gore that is rampant in the comic book industry. While Miller's hyper violence made sense in his society gone mad mythos, contemporary comic book illustrators just add gross violence everywhere. It's very hard to find books that don't go for the over-the-top blood and guts without any real meaning.
Yeah great pioneers revolutionize genres and then later the rest of their peers imitate the most superficial aspects of their aesthetic without understanding the deeper meaning behind it.