The Counterculture Canon

Novella,

novella said:

This is just a lot of hot air at this point.

Click to expand...

That does confirm my suspicion that what we have had here is 'a failure to communicate.'

Peder, pontalba, and SFG

Click to expand...

,
And in the context of the previous thought, that sounds like my invitation to get out of here, and fast!

The dominant culture in the US right now is FAR from anything I would call countercultural at any time. It’s right-wing, consumerist, willfully ignorant, obsessed with celebrity, taken up with traditional Christianity.

Click to expand...

And those sound like the kind of fightin words I would expect to hear in a 'mature' discussion such as this forum is soon going to allow.

And which are prime examples of why I will stay out as far as I possibly can, or else leave the forum entirely. That level of accusatory baloney is more than I listen to with equanimity.

So, I am now going to retire to a nice local tavern outside the main walls of the stadium here, hoist a few, and curl up in a corner with a nice book from one of their shelves.

Mods take note: There are times I wish this B&R forum allowed putting entire threads on Ignore.

/whoosh/
I'm outta here,
Peder

novella said:

This is just a lot of hot air at this point. Peder, pontalba, and SFG, I think that in order to have this discussion at any decent level it would be helpful not to generalize about what large populations of stereotypes pulled from thin air might be doing if they actually existed.

The dominant culture in the US right now is FAR from anything I would call countercultural at any time. It’s right-wing, consumerist, willfully ignorant, obsessed with celebrity, taken up with traditional Christianity. Further, in the context of a literary canon, the current obsession with confessional memoir and political diatribe says a lot about the times we live in, and these books are coming out of the minds of people born well after 1970 (Eggers, Frey, Burroughs and co; Coulter and co), while poor old Al Gore is still talking about the fate of the earth.

Click to expand...

If you Novella speak of "decent level" and "not to generalize" perhaps you should not have added tha last paragraph above. Seems rather a generalization of large populations. And rather a misconception at that.

This is turning into a political diatribe, and I have no wish to participate.
/unsubscribe to this thread/

Hang on a second. You guys are the ones who brought culture at large and political leanings into it. I would have liked to discuss particular authors and books and their influence. If you read the thread, you will see that I've tried repeatedly to come back to partculars and to books and authors and their legacy, but other posters have insisted on discussing issues beyond that scope. And I personally wish the thread had not gone that way. Todays politics is outside the scope of my interest here, which I think was pretty clear throughout the thread, yet the topic has insistently been pushed in.

One can discuss the 'modern' writers of the 20s and 30s (who are not modern by the definition of the word in general, but are of the modern period). I wanted to discuss authors of the 20th century who might fit into what might be called the Counterculture Canon. I feel like that concept has been deliberately misunderstood and equated with some kind of political voice, which I actually don't believe is true. So I have merely asked, with particular reference to books and authors, why?

Fair enough. I was talking about "Zen and..." the other day. Why do you consider it a "counter culture" book?'

Well, I would consider 'Zen . . .' part of the genre for a couple of reasons. For one, it's a quest book set in modern times, with the quest being both a very individual search for philosophical 'truths' about how to live and a cross-generational journey of father and son. The concerns with mysticism and morality and ways of living 'truly' are at the center, IMO, of the genre, beginning with Emerson and Thoreau and on to Whitman and Herman Hesse.

Thinking about this some more, maybe these are some of the threads that tie this imagined body of work together?

If the genre includes Thoreau and Hess, is "Counter culture" the best name for it?

Also, I see a lot of similarities between "Zen.." and "Catcher.." The search for absolute “Truth” can lead to insanity.

I loved “Fear and Loathing..” It certainly makes the point that anyone hoping to find absolute truth during a LCD hallucination is likely to come across as insane.

A concept I’d like to explore, but I’m still not sure why you consider it “counter culture?”

novella said:

a very individual search for philosophical 'truths'

Click to expand...

I'd argue that "Zen.." proposes that there is such a thing as "Absolute Truth," but that we need to redefine it, and come to understand it in our own way. Which makes me think of Kierkegaard. I'd accept that he was "counter culture" for his time, but wonder if you'd consider him relevant to this discussion?

novella said:

This ‘shrewd observation’ is based on nothing. It has no correlation in reality.

Click to expand...

Oh I disagree, and will point out specific examples where it is based on a valid "something."

These books are actually NOT read at the university level nor at the high school level as part of the curriculum.

Click to expand...

If there ever was a generalization, it was this statement. Consider that USC, not an academic lightweight institution by any means, required the reading of Catch-22, a counterculture work in your canon list of works. A simple googling also reveals that The Electric Kool-Aid Test is also ensconced in course syllabus, after course syllabus, after syllabus. Kerouac is also quite prominent as well as he's listed time, and time, and time again. Yes, many works are by women of different ethnicities and theoretical orientations. At the same time, picking a work as the selected reading for first year students at orientation does say a lot. These countercultural works are very much a part of the "establishment" today and pontalba's point is still valid as these concrete examples show. It's one thing to be part of an "under ground" curriculum, it's quite another to be in media studies, history, and various other courses at prestigious universities and colleges across the nation.

The dominant culture in the US right now is FAR from anything I would call countercultural at any time. It’s right-wing, consumerist, willfully ignorant, obsessed with celebrity, taken up with traditional Christianity.

Click to expand...

I agree that what constitutes countercultural has a lot to do with politics. I understand Peder's trepidation upon seeing the water's edge of politics in this thread, but I think it's somewhat necessary to get into. Yes, we are somewhat more *conservative* culturally, but that doesn't mean that everything that is conservative isn't countercultural. When the dominant culture gives people pay checks in what is essentially, incubators of crime and personal vice, it is countercultural to suggest as Marvin Olasky does, that (a)people need to take responsibility; (b)warped cognitive thinking in such environments and the government's abetting of that behavior is no way to run a society. Maybe it's not accurate in many respects, and I do not agree with Olasky, but to me, he is countercultural in regards to what the bureaucrats in Washington and the social services sectors believe. People like the president read his works and the institutions are engaged in welfare reform now, albeit grudgingly.

Doug Johnson said:

If the genre includes Thoreau and Hess, is "Counter culture" the best name for it?

Also, I see a lot of similarities between "Zen.." and "Catcher.." The search for absolute “Truth” can lead to insanity.

I loved “Fear and Loathing..” It certainly makes the point that anyone hoping to find absolute truth during a LCD hallucination is likely to come across as insane.

A concept I’d like to explore, but I’m still not sure why you consider it “counter culture?”

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with you about the naming. I'm not sure.

Well, this is funny. I was thinkiing about what you've written here, and stories of quest and quasiphilosophy, etc., and I googled a bit and found this :

http://www.gnooks.com/

which really prods my associative ideas on the subject.

Take a look. Type in Pirsig or Kesey or Thoreau in the map of literature box and see what it shows you. Ha ha.

SFG, I think once again you are roaming far afield of this discussion and pointedly not 'getting' it for some reason. The essential question--and has been from the beginning-- is not how one defines or recognizes 'counterculture' in all its various shades through eternity but how we talk about these works.

novella said:

The essential question--and has been from the beginning-- is not how one defines or recognizes 'counterculture' in all its various shades through eternity but how we talk about these works.

Click to expand...

novella said:

Yeah, I agree with you about the naming. I'm not sure.

Click to expand...

It was very big of you to admit that maybe you didn't name things properly.

I'll admit that I've read “Catcher”, “Zen.." and “Fear and Loathing”. I didn't realize the philosophical similarities until you brought it up, so you’re definitely on to something interesting.

novella said:

SFG, I think once again you are roaming far afield of this discussion and pointedly not 'getting' it for some reason. The essential question--and has been from the beginning-- is not how one defines or recognizes 'counterculture' in all its various shades through eternity but how we talk about these works.

Click to expand...

In discussing "how we talk about these works," isn't it also necesary to mention "how one defines or recognizes 'counterculure' in all it's various shades?" The thread, and most specifically, pontalba's observation is very much on topic. It's especially poignant as it addresses several similar questions you posted in your first post in this thread.

Are these books dated or do they still resonate with people? Do they seem like a load of hippie-dippie drug-addled conformist nonsense?

Click to expand...

SFG75 said:

In discussing "how we talk about these works," isn't it also necesary to mention "how one defines or recognizes 'counterculure' in all it's various shades?" The thread, and most specifically, pontalba's observation is very much on topic. It's especially poignant as it addresses several similar questions you posted in your first post in this thread.

Click to expand...

pontalba doesn't address that question at all. She just says that the 'counterculture' of yesterday is the mainstream of today while simultaneously saying that nothing ever changes, two contradictory statements.

I simply do not agree that the counterculture of yesterday is the mainstream of today at all. I would say that many people are inurred to the bizarre, the unique, the personal, and the horrible, but that's a different thing. Not being upset by something is not the same as endorsing it or practicing it. pontalba chooses not to discuss particular books and authors, which puts her opinion on the matter somewhat outside the discussion.

The question of whether this body of literature is relevant is distinct: if it is, where does the relevance lie; if it isn't, why is it irrelevant? Those issues haven't been discussed here,except briefly by Doug.

Further to the naming issue, I think there is an 'antisocial' thread through these works, which is not to say misanthropic, but antisocial in the sense of the individual redefining a way to be where to place one's heart's ambition, and whether it's relevant to the world outside the self.

novella said:

I simply do not agree that the counterculture of yesterday is the mainstream of today at all.

Click to expand...

Neither would I, but I would say that some counterculture ideas are more acceptable than they used to be. Others, lets take Aleister Crowley as an example, will probably always be considered 'out there', and in his case, that's probably a good thing too.

novella said:

The question of whether this body of literature is relevant is distinct: if it is, where does the relevance lie; if it isn't, why is it irrelevant? Those issues haven't been discussed here,except briefly by Doug.

Click to expand...

I think that depends on who you are. For some these ideas are highly relevant, if they are seeking another way to live or look at life. But as I said in an earlier post, you could also view the "Counterculture" as being rather self indulgent. If you’re struggling for a roof over your head, or to find the next meal or are fearful of the knock at your door, exactly how relevant to your life is “Naked Lunch?”

Regards,

K-S

Perhaps Naked Lunch would be less than relevant, but if you are angry, underemployed, resentful, feeling disenfranchised and poverty stricken because the steel mill has just closed its doors or the shoe-store franchise was gobbled up, something like Be Here Now might be very relevant indeed.

Or, for that matter, Henry Thoreau's On Walden Pond or Civil Disobedience.

Then I guess different people, in different circumstances and from different cultures would have differing views of what was relevant or not. If you belonged to some rain forest dwelling tribe which uses hallucinogenic drugs as a rite of passage when I’d guess that a reading from The Naked Lunch may be far more relevant than a treatise on civil rights.

K-S

I think there are two types of work here: journalist/documentarians and primary experiencers. Didion and Wolfe would be the former. Hunter S. would be both, Kerouac and Thoreau would be both. I would put something like Peter Coyote's Sleeping Where I Fall into the journalistic catagory, as he has the benefit of hindsight and personal distance, though it's autobiographical. I'm sure he would have written a very different book in 1968. Also along documentarian lines is this nutty anthology I have called The Music of Their Laughter.

I've never read Trout Fishing in America. Has anyone out there? I always thought it would rub me the wrong way.

I know that I posted in this thread already, but it seems to have been a hundred years ago. So, in answer to your question as I now understand it, the "counterculture canon" does exist. And, it seems to me that it's relevance continues, if for no ther reason that additions are still being made.
Will the day come when A Million Little Pieces is regarded as "countercultural" because it "goofed" (intentionally or not) on certain publishing trends?

I've never read Trout Fishing in America. Has anyone out there? I always thought it would rub me the wrong way.

Click to expand...

I feel sort of the same way. Have you ever read Raymond Mungo?

Interesting thread!

Ive just read "Another Bullshit Night in Suck City" by Nick Flynn. I really liked the book and would think it fit the category of counterculture.

To me counterculture is a memoir, an author who doesnt set out to portait himself great or being the one who finds "the truth" about life. Its kinda raw literature with lots of naked ugly truth and thats why I enjoy it.

Nick Flynn do write about his life in a honest raw style but he also manages to do "some Auster", by writing a book about a book which doesnt exist and then again it does somehow!

Flower

Counterculture

I've enjoyed almost all the books you have listed. As a boomer these were some of the voices we hungered for, breaths of fresh air, expressing our higher impulses. I know what you're getting at, and I wonder too, if there will be a rallying manifesto for this age. Or perhaps many. Sure do hope so.