Chuck Palahniuk

[jay]

Contrary to popular belief at my art school, and most definitely this thread, I don't think Chuck is a well thought out man.

First off, and I imagine it’s what you meant, Chuck may not be a well thought of *writer*. Aside from my lack of interest in his newer works, the “man” is a great guy. Anyone meeting him, hearing him talk or even writing him a letter will more than likely confirm this.

Anyway, as you state, he may be cool in your school, and I believe this is the audience he is trying for. So by, I would think, his own measuring stick, he _is_ ‘well thought of’.

I just checked the NYTimes Best Seller list and now after fighting off explosions in my head of “Literacy is dead! Literacy is dead!” I will report that, for week-ending 28 May, _Haunted_ has been on the list for 4 weeks.
Last week it was #8, now it’s #11.
So, to a certain extent, he is ‘well thought of’ by the general public.

As for ‘literary circles’, no, I’ve barely ever heard his name pop up. A past professor of mine was using _Fight Club_ in a class about 8 years ago, and I believe I’ve heard of others citing CP in their school’s syllabuses. Not that this means much, as there are whole semester courses dedicated to Stephen King…
The few times I’ve brought him up in ‘literary circles’ there has been little to no response.

My usually long-winded point is I don’t think Chuck was/is trying to be the next ‘F. S. Fitzgerald’ (or whomever). His career choice after a debut success seems to be being a “popular writer”.
This is just the way of the world now. Happens in every field; Alicia Keys could, with little effort, make a true and good rhythm and blues record, like with a band. Instead she chose the path of “R&B” (an entirely different entity), which means less thought towards music, more thought to over-dubs and exposing as much of one’s body as one can. It’s a shame, but this is this. Some guys and girls will struggle through the labour of medical school, possibly with the skill to be an excellent surgeon, practitioner or researcher. But the money is in sucking the fat out of people’s asses and making them look “younger” than their children. This is this.

I'll have you know, before the scoffs and general disapproval, that for some unknown reason I am really disappointed that I can't get into him. (Which leaves me with an empty feeling in my heart whenever he has a new book on the stands.)

I agree with you. I’m not terribly sure why I still give his work a try…I don’t go in wanting to hate it.
Bottom line is I’m just not the audience Chuck is trying to speak too.

j

 

[KBomb_reads]

Art school is not just painting and drawing, which is what people tend to think it is. It's really hard work, and here I am trying to tell you that although I work hard, many people do not. And although it is hard work, it's not what some people mind call "mind stimulating." If I were to tell people there of my plan for life after school, they would probably dismiss me as not a "real" artist. (at the moment I go to two colleges one for a teaching degree and one for a BFA in illustration; paradoxically, not to become soley an "artist") But to the contrary, I believe art and literature go hand-in-hand. An artist is what he/she knows and is able to express from that.
A typical artist from my school would be interested in a psychological thriller that best describes his life. Instead of becoming more elloquent himself or even *smarter, he will just look for someone who says it for him.
Having said that.. Chuck's audience from my school isn't an intelligent crowd. More than 3/4 of them are actually considered bad artists by the professors, who are composed of successful artists themselves. It is mostly a last resort for the kids who did poorly in highschool, which is a pity to say in the least.
I wish instead of discussing Chuck and FightClub (probably easiest one to discuss because it is now a movie), David Lynch's entirely subjective films, and/or Requiem for a Dream, and all that.. I wish.. I could discuss more novels and literature, doesn't matter which, really, just as long as they aren't all riding the same wind.

 

[KBomb_reads]

I mean well thought out writer. I guess my post wasn't well thought out either.

 

[jay]

Having said that.. Chuck's audience from my school isn't an intelligent crowd.

That’s what I would have assumed. As I’ve rambled in the past, ‘gross out’ humour may be cute when one is 15, or loaded on watered-down beer, but not in many other situations…

As for “art” school, I worked many years in the ‘medical area’ of Boston, neighboring Mass College of Art, and took several night courses there also. So I completely understand, and personally loathe, the “I’m an artist” mentality. Walking around in paint-splattered clothes (some of it done intentionally, no less) does not an “artist” make.

Bringing this back to literature, and semi-specifically _Haunted_, needless to say there is a large crowd that considers themselves “writers”, because it’s cool, instead of just simply writing.
When this kind of thing is slightly parodied I have a feeling the reader, if they are in that group, doesn’t even ‘get it’.

I wish.. I could discuss more novels and literature, doesn't matter which, really, just as long as they aren't all riding the same wind.

Throughout my Uni time I have very seldom met fellow students that I’ve really enjoyed conversing with. However, I’ve made pretty strong bonds with many professors, some of whom I still speak to today (well, virtually speak)…and swapping books and stories with them has been a treat. I’d think in the creative fields it’s fairly easy to approach a teacher and verge a creative conversation toward ‘off-topic’ things. Give it a whirl.

j

 

[jay]

Since we were somewhat following it, week-ending June 4th:
_Haunted_’s 5th week on the NYT list, it still remains in the eleventh spot.
j

 

[KBomb_reads]

I most often find that conversations with professors and older adults are rewarding, as opposed to the conversations, or lack there of, with the students.
In fact, not to long ago, we were listening to Breakfast of Champions on tape. There are several derogatory slurs and comments on gays, blacks, and any other people but the white characters who make up the cast. So a "Christian" black kid, asked the teacher, "Why is this book like that?"
This is a kid who doesn't know where missouri is, and complains about Mark Twain, who also satarizes southern racism. So my teacher tells him it's really making fun of all those people (to put it in simpler terms.) And I tell him it's not really about that, and the book is most engaging in the end. It's really good because the end is the best part.
So he kept going on and on about how he had never heard of such racism, it's horrible the way people think, etc. This minor altercation in class stemmed into something greater out of class because I was seriously upset that he was not listening to us at all. I asked him flat out in class "are you listening to us?" to which he responded, "Yes, you're saying it was alright in the times that they wrote their books." Which was not what we were saying at all.. IT'S A SATIRE!
So I was expressing my anger to my friend (also in the class) and this guy's friends heard and told him that I was talking behind his back. *this couldn't be more juvinile. So he came over and told me that he may not "search for knowledge" as much as I do, but I don't need to throw it in his face. The whole spiel about I don't know anything about him or his christian beliefs, etc. etc.
SOOO- I was very upset by this, because even though he sat there and told me I didn't listen to him at all, he wouldn't listen to anything I said regarding the book. He couldn't even get out names right. (Calling me Callie *my name is Kelly, my friend Heather, Heder, and Jeremy, Jarmy.) Mind you, this kid is completely American, no foreign background, no accents. I wasn't appalled by his stupidity, it just never ceases to annoy, anger, frustrate (and other verbs) me that there are 5 billion others just like him in the world. Not to mention the other 295 million people in America. In the end (which really gets me) my teacher didn't allow us to listen to the end of the book, and no lesson was learned by the other guy, as I would have liked it to be. But was he really listening to it anyway? Probably not closely enough, if this is what comes of it.
Did I ever think once in highschool that it would be the same stuff in College? No. I thought there would be more sophisticated people.. How disappointing.
On a lighter note...
I went to the bookstore yesterday and came across Stranger Than Fiction, I think it is. And I read one chapter or short story and noticed that he reuses the same phrases, which really bothers me. The part where.. "Bad" is not ther right word, but it's the first word that comes to mind. I started to realize that after I had read both Choke and Diary and was on to survivor, that Chuck P. regenerates the same stuff. But I guess when you think about it.. A lot of good writers do.
And I don't want to trash my school, because that would be dissing myself... There are SOME smart people there, but isn't it like that everywhere else?

 

[jay]

I went to the bookstore yesterday and came across Stranger Than Fiction, I think it is. And I read one chapter or short story and noticed that he reuses the same phrases, which really bothers me. The part where.. "Bad" is not ther right word, but it's the first word that comes to mind. I started to realize that after I had read both Choke and Diary and was on to survivor, that Chuck P. regenerates the same stuff. But I guess when you think about it.. A lot of good writers do.

I don’t agree that a good writer will continually regurgitate. There may be a familiarity in style (Saramago, for example) or themes (Kafka, for example) but this usually isn’t achieved by hammering it into the ground.
A style happens, it can’t be forced.
But Chuck forces it. It’s a bit like giving yourself a nickname. It’s just not right.

And as you may have seen, that book you picked up is a collection of essays. Nonfictions. So the Chuck’isms are no different.
Which is not even close to a great move for a fiction writer.

And now back to our excursion which *does* have its circuitousness:

And I don't want to trash my school, because that would be dissing myself... There are SOME smart people there, but isn't it like that everywhere else?

I’d probably say that yes, it’s generally like that everywhere. As a species we were cruising too fast, breeding too much, diluting intelligence, and we hit the speed bump at full throttle; the tyres are now blown and…well, we’ve failed.
Just try to laugh at the rest of the ride. It’s twisted, it’s sick and it smells funny, but try to find the humour in it. Sometimes you’ll laugh through tears, or anger, but it’s…about the only option.
Example: while yes it’s realllllllly depressing to see adults get all sticky for a children’s book, and yes it’s tilted the decline of literacy and reading to irreparable angles, and yes bookstores suffer **monumentally** because of it…but it *is* funny.
In a sick way….

And yes, there will always be some religious nutters that can’t grasp Reality, and there will always be some blacks (feel free to get them to drop the astoundingly absurd “African-American” moniker by asking where around/exactly in Africa their people come from and/or by asking “if I show you a map, can you point to Africa in less than 5 seconds?”) rallying against the past instead of focusing on the future. Needless to say hordes of uniformed whites(et al), most of whom don’t even know their past, will also babble about, “Well, I think Faulkner was trying to say…” or “The French are…”
- a good professor will gently cut them off after wasting too much class time. Time you the student are paying for.
If not, try it yourself (it can be fun).

What a cheery post!
j

 

[KBomb_reads]

Right right right.

 

[lenny nero]

There is a good article on Palahniuk in the new issue of Rolling Stone(Jessica Alba cover).

 

[jay]

http://suicidegirls.com/words/Chuck+Palahniuk+-+Haunted/

CP: I had two separate books I was going to do. I was going to do a novella that was about these people in this sort of fairy tale setting gradually destroying themselves. They were all going to be book and movie and music critics who were so sick of what they were being forced to review that they were going to get away from the world and were going to incubate their own sort of uber-culture. But once they got sort of squirreled away, they realized that they couldn’t even produce stuff as good as what they were trashing and they didn’t have a creative bone in their body. All they could do was tear stuff apart. So they started tearing themselves apart to make a story.

Then the stories themselves were going to be just a collection. Then the publishing house talked me into sort of putting them together and making a sort of bizarre novel out of it.
. . . . . . . . .
[j: wow, what a colossal screw up in the publisher’s part. I believe every review I’ve read comments that the stories should have been stand-alone and that the supposed inter-connecting stories suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks. Which is true, if one wants to be “nice” about it.]
. . . . . . . . .

[what’s next:]

CP: It is sort of a dysfunctional science fiction novel based on American car culture. There hasn’t been a great car novel since maybe Christine and that was a long time ago. So I think that we just really need a good car culture novel.

[j: Christine was good, let alone “great”??? Christ on a bike…anyway, no.
Ballard’s _Crash_ (and _Concrete Island_ are still in print (last I heard)), so we don’t need another car’ish book.

j

 

[Idril Silmaure]

I have only read 'Fight Club', but I will definately read more by him..I love his style. I read 'Fight Club', I must admit, because I saw the movie and absolutely adored it. So I thought the book must be great. And it didn't disappoint me. But who prefered the movie to the book, or the other way round? I cannot decide which is better..I also find it quite difficult to decide cause they're pretty similar and seem so synchronised with each other that it's hard to see one or the other as better.

 

[Chixulub]

I have only read 'Fight Club', but I will definately read more by him..I love his style. I read 'Fight Club', I must admit, because I saw the movie and absolutely adored it. So I thought the book must be great. And it didn't disappoint me. But who prefered the movie to the book, or the other way round? I cannot decide which is better..I also find it quite difficult to decide cause they're pretty similar and seem so synchronised with each other that it's hard to see one or the other as better.

I think it's an unusual case when the movie improves upon a book, but 'Fight Club' is one of those exceptions. There are things I'd do differently, sure (I'd include the perfume scene, for instance). But instead of Tyler getting beaten up by the projectionist's Union boss and the spacemonkeys killing the boss, I think it works much better to just have 'Jack' do the beat up scene and blackmail his boss.

Also, as much as I loved the fat-wrestling in Marla's mother, a collagen trust is unlikely for someone who steals clothes for money. Plus, I doubt you could take any old lump of fat out of your freezer and take it to the plastic surgeon to get poofy, bee-stung lips. So the logic of doing the same 'gross out' thing with the biohazard bag on the razor-wire is more plausible.

I still like the book, but (and Chuck is the first to admit this) it has some debut novel flaws. I think 'Survivor,' his second book, is easily his strongest. It's the one I come back to the most. I enjoy 'Choke' and 'Lullaby' quite a bit as well.

'Diary' was the first one I remember seeing bad-mouthed at The Cult. I liked it, but I thought the ending could have been better thought out. I also found the class warfare angle hollow, and I didn't think he really sold the betrayal of Misty by Tabitha. 'Invisible Monsters' was the first book I read of Chuck's that was one I wouldn't recommend personally. The latest one, 'Haunted' is a combination of some clever short stories with incoherent connective material and bad pseudo-poetry. I truly enjoy some of the stories in it, but the overall effect is not a $24.95 value. Or worth the time.

 

[ruby]

I loved the book but hated the film,couldnt get into it at all turned it off after half an hr

 

[Ya Krunk'd Floo]

I've only read 'Survivor' and I thought it was dull.

 

[Chixulub]

I've only read 'Survivor' and I thought it was dull.

Okay, let me know where the bridge is that I'm supposed to push you off of. That's his best book! You're an Infidel and must be dealt with!

Go figure, it appears 'Haunted' is his most successful to date, sales-wise, and it's dead last in my ranking of his books. And it's rare that I've read 'through' an author with more than two or three books out. I skip around too much, or get burned to bad on a given book. But I've read all of Chuck's books and 'Survivor' really is my favorite.

To each his own? Nope, gotta push you off a bridge, Infidel!

 

[Ya Krunk'd Floo]

I found it contrived and lacking in literary flair. I expected much more from someone who was so highly recommended...

What about it rock'd your boat so much?

 

[jay]

I found it contrived and lacking in literary flair. I expected much more from someone who was so highly recommended...

I’d have to re-read it (I read it when it came out) to really give a comment on it, but I thought it was ok.
Not written very well (but better than his debut _Fight Club_) but had some ok ideas.
I was hoping it was the start to, maybe, an important writer.
The follow-up (I tend to ignore _Invisible Monsters_), _Choke_ had some great elements but I could *clearly* Chuck was trying to be a [certain kind of] “writer” instead of just writing.
After that it’s an avalanched cascade downhill to juvenile fiction, writing and thought – which is no surprise, as Chix says, that he’s now more popular than ever, so he’s found his audience.

Frankly, I’d recommend going into well recommended books/writers with little-to-no expectations…and/or, as they say, “consider the source”.

 

[G4G]

I just finished Survivor yesterday. Or was it the day before? Whatever - I quite enjoyed it. No, not what I'd call a 'literary' work, but entertaining. Kind of half 'literary' and half 'blockbuster', I suppose you could say. I do hate the term 'literary' though - sounds incredibly stuffy.

 

[Idril Silmaure]

He doesn't write in a particularly pedantic or so-called 'literary' style, but that doesn't mean it's not good literature. If everything was written in such a style I think books would get incredibly boring, I like his style I think it's refreshing and powerful.

 

[dragynlady]

I have only read Diary and Lullaby. I have to say I am not a lofty type that cares much if something is literary, in fact I may not be sophisticated enough to make the distinction in nuance betwixt the literary and the mundane. If the story keeps me engaged, then I count the book as a good one. Anything that stretches reality, to downright blowing it out of the water, is the kind of thing I like to read. I read for entertainment, and I find Palahniuk really entertaining.