Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Originality comes from context. Kafka and Harms looked original against the background of the literature that preceded them. According to Benjamin, Art Nouveau and the avant-garde tried to do in literature the same thing that opened up new types of art, in particular, cinema. For example, you can slow down or speed up time inside a piece, give a comprehensive view of an object outside its usual environment, and so on. We appreciate this originality, but over time, cinema began to cope with all these tasks much more effectively, to make new experiments that literature was becoming increasingly difficult to imitate, so cinema (TV series, video games) is replacing the place of literature in life and art. In the presence of certain extravagant literary experiments, we also live in the era of the” death of the author ” – any technique or concept can no longer be firmly tied to the image of Harms or Kafka – that is, the writer as a cult figure, who is the only one given power over the word. At best, the writer becomes a pop star like Pelevin.
For lovers of pure madness, though not schizophrenia and manic-depressive psychosis like Harms and Kafka, but rather a terrible sexualized psychopathy, I can recommend Pierre Guillot, whose novels are so crazy that they were even banned in his native France. For me personally, “Eden, Eden, Eden “and” The Book ” have become some of my favorite books.
Guyot's main themes are war, prostitution, and violence in its various forms.
In Eden, Eden, Eden, he describes his version of the” natural man ” – the pervert, the murderer, the rapist. The people in the novel are not people, but nervous nodules in a howling, living, formless substance. There are no people, no life, only an endless cycle of flesh-on-flesh violence, provoked by the natural state of man – war. The whole text is written in one sentence, which can be interpreted in different ways-whether it is an indication of that formless sub-station, or a single cry of many dying, orgasming, warring non-humans.
In The Book, Guillot explores prostitution, starting the story in reverse order, from the whores of World War II to Biblical times. As an epigraph, I would put to the novel: “And do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul.” However, in the novel, people turn into separate organs that serve other people, that is, they become dehumanized, lose their soul. However, going back in time reveals that they were once human beings, which leaves us with no hope of saving our souls. Perhaps this is the only work of Guillot, which is at least somewhat optimistic.�
Guyota is still alive, so there are still some crazy and original writers.
I won't tell you for the whole of Odessa, the whole of Odessa is very big, but the books of Theo Ohm are also quite interesting. I would even say that they are more original and crazy than Kafka and Harms.
Not exactly in our time, but closer to us than Kafka and Harms-John Fowles. Personally, I am not a fan of it, but “Magus” made a great impression on me. Very original and talented. This is the most important thing if you want to get an idea of what is postmodern in literature (just as Kafka gives an idea of modernity).
In terms of originality – Jonathan Safran Feuer and Mark Danilevsky. Friends experiment with the form, trying to make the book as a physical object part of the narrative. It can be compared with Harms ' experiments with word forms. Probably, Pavich can also be attributed here.