The tides are turning in contemporary American literature and Im not sure its necessarily a good tide thats washing in. I mean, while "The Average American Male" and "Apathy" are entertaining to read, Im not getting too much emotion or maturity out of the Average American Novel, but is it really all bad?
"The Average American Male" is a novel detailing the day to day thoughts and movements of an average American male. The discriptions are accurate to a T. Everything Chad Kultgen says, thinks or does, is exactly what myself, or any of my friends would say, think or do. He so captures the pure raw, sexuality of men, although he captures it in a 10th grade sort of way. He describes everything in a rich, accurate and sex-starved sort of way. He struggles with the social confines set upon him by his parents, his friends,his girlfriend and society as a whole. He meets this struggle with a hedonistic, apathetic and fatalistic point of view. Whatever happens happens, but he is going to bang this chick on his way out.
"Apathy" begins much the same way as "The Average American Male", with the main character set firmly in a state of self-inflicted debauchery. The main character, Shane, wakes up in a pile of salt. He stole salt shakers, put them in his pocket and passed out drunk in his bed. He happens into a farcical situation with a deaf dentist's assistant and other absurd characters, but he perpetuates his (I dont want to call it self-loathing) negative sitaution by not changing anything. Much like Chad's character, he simply shrugs his shoulders and moves on. He changes nothing, merely accepting his sitaution as set about by fate.
The bad thing about this style of literature is that many young Americans are already lazy and apathetic. They dont need books telling them how to do it. They already have magazines confusing lazyness and apathy with a grander, more philosophical discipline. "What me worry?" was a mantra for a generation. "Can't someone else do it?" was a catch phrase for a fictional TV town. Im afraid "Eh, fuck it" will be this generation's.
Between Augusten Burroughs and others creating "non-fiction" based around sensational modern situations and other young authors putting out this brand of fatalist lit, I would be afraid of where these books are leading us. However, when you look at what else is out there, you see why these books need to exist. Without this modern, hedonsitic subgenre, you are left with modern classics like Michal Ondonche and Jhumpa Lahiri or you get Sue Grafton or Tom Clancy. Basically, there are three kinds of fiction: Brilliant, basic or relative. People read Sue Grafton because its basic and easy to read. People read Ian McEwen because he paints beautiful landscapes, and wonderful characters, and draws the reader into the world so vividly, you cant help but be dynamically transported wherever he takes you. People read and will continue to read books like "Running with scissors", "Apathy" and "The Average American Male" because its basic, and relative. But you knwo what, I dont care as long as people get back into books. Consequences be damned if it gets more average American people out from in front of the TV. Ian McEwen saw his book fly to the top of the NYT BestSeller list when Atonement began receiving accolades as a motion picture. People find the book, because its all of a sudden relative. I say it doesnt matter, as long as it gets people into liturature.
Lets have a run on the post modern sensationalist fiction, as long as it gets people interested in books again.
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment