Jason Howell
asked
pleasefindthis:
pft... I'm asking this of several writers, some friends, some strangers... What genre or tradition do you see yourself as being part of, and what is the beauty of writing within that genre/tradition? What can it do that others can't? Thanks.
pleasefindthis
I would like to think that I fall within the New Sincerity idea, predicted by David Foster Wallace and exemplified by musicians such as Daniel Johnston.
You can read more about the idea here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sin...
Quote:
"The next real literary “rebels” in this country might well emerge as some weird bunch of anti-rebels, born oglers who dare somehow to back away from ironic watching, who have the childish gall actually to endorse and instantiate single-entendre principles. Who treat of plain old untrendy human troubles and emotions in U.S. life with reverence and conviction. Who eschew self-consciousness and hip fatigue. These anti-rebels would be outdated, of course, before they even started. Dead on the page. Too sincere. Clearly repressed. Backward, quaint, naive, anachronistic. Maybe that’ll be the point. Maybe that’s why they’ll be the next real rebels. Real rebels, as far as I can see, risk disapproval. The old postmodern insurgents risked the gasp and squeal: shock, disgust, outrage, censorship, accusations of socialism, anarchism, nihilism. Today’s risks are different. The new rebels might be artists willing to risk the yawn, the rolled eyes, the cool smile, the nudged ribs, the parody of gifted ironists, the “Oh how banal”. To risk accusations of sentimentality, melodrama. Of overcredulity. Of softness. Of willingness to be suckered by a world of lurkers and starers who fear gaze and ridicule above imprisonment without law. Who knows."
My work is very straightforward and does what it says on the can. When I started writing like this in 2007, it gained a degree of popularity because, I think, everything else was drenched in irony, or trying to be funny, or cynical, or surreal. Back then I struggled to get a book deal because there was no reference point for what I'd done, and of course now there are four or five other writers who are constantly referenced in the same breath as me.
I write very straightforward prose and poetry about love or life or myself or other people. It's surfs up against the edge of being saccharine and I'm aware of that, but I also think that when it succeeds, it succeeds in a way that only something said truly sincerely can. That would be the beauty in it, as far as I'm concerned.
As I said in my first sentence, I "would like" to think that's where I fall within the idea of genre.
Otherwise I just write very commercially successful, very accessible poetry, which is a cardinal sin in academic circles, as far as I can tell.
You can read more about the idea here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sin...
Quote:
"The next real literary “rebels” in this country might well emerge as some weird bunch of anti-rebels, born oglers who dare somehow to back away from ironic watching, who have the childish gall actually to endorse and instantiate single-entendre principles. Who treat of plain old untrendy human troubles and emotions in U.S. life with reverence and conviction. Who eschew self-consciousness and hip fatigue. These anti-rebels would be outdated, of course, before they even started. Dead on the page. Too sincere. Clearly repressed. Backward, quaint, naive, anachronistic. Maybe that’ll be the point. Maybe that’s why they’ll be the next real rebels. Real rebels, as far as I can see, risk disapproval. The old postmodern insurgents risked the gasp and squeal: shock, disgust, outrage, censorship, accusations of socialism, anarchism, nihilism. Today’s risks are different. The new rebels might be artists willing to risk the yawn, the rolled eyes, the cool smile, the nudged ribs, the parody of gifted ironists, the “Oh how banal”. To risk accusations of sentimentality, melodrama. Of overcredulity. Of softness. Of willingness to be suckered by a world of lurkers and starers who fear gaze and ridicule above imprisonment without law. Who knows."
My work is very straightforward and does what it says on the can. When I started writing like this in 2007, it gained a degree of popularity because, I think, everything else was drenched in irony, or trying to be funny, or cynical, or surreal. Back then I struggled to get a book deal because there was no reference point for what I'd done, and of course now there are four or five other writers who are constantly referenced in the same breath as me.
I write very straightforward prose and poetry about love or life or myself or other people. It's surfs up against the edge of being saccharine and I'm aware of that, but I also think that when it succeeds, it succeeds in a way that only something said truly sincerely can. That would be the beauty in it, as far as I'm concerned.
As I said in my first sentence, I "would like" to think that's where I fall within the idea of genre.
Otherwise I just write very commercially successful, very accessible poetry, which is a cardinal sin in academic circles, as far as I can tell.
More Answered Questions
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more