i was just kinda musing there about reasons why Homestuck feels out of place when compared to canonical literature, which it kinda does to me, 'it's a comedy' was something that came to mind, i.e. you can't really take it seriously, but then i said it seemed like a superficial reason, which it is
there *is* a tendency in critical circles to differentiate between 'literature' and 'genre fiction', but actually i think critics are more receptive to comedic elements than they are to e.g. sentimentality, in any case
A long time ago, I read something where somebody (can't remember who) said "in America, whatever is new is automatically considered good and whatever is old is suspect. In Britain it is the opposite." Now that may be bullshit for all I know. But it got me thinking about something: instinctively favoring what is new and novel vs. instinctively favoring what is established and "classic". I think I tend to fall on the latter side of that line. So maybe I am a grognard. Although I don't play D&D. But yeah, that's why stuff like "Homestuck is the new Ulysses" kinda irks me, because you don't get to be considered a great classic thing immediately. Time doesn't allow it; She's a bit more picky than that.
Actually, I think that fear of Time is part of why I like things with "classic" status; they've managed to survive while Time has been destroying everything else left and right. Gives a sense (somewhat an illusion, but whatever) of permanence.
well, if something has survived for an extended period of time, in the popular consciousness it means that:
1. it is presumably of a relatively high level of distinctiveness (*and ideally quality*)
2. other things have come up to responding to it artistically. art doenst exist in isolation, it exists in a dialogue with other things within the body of culture
so yeah, saying "Homestuck is the new [whatever classic thing]" would be patently ridiculous. any sort of comparisons in terms of what actually goes on in them aside, it generally comes across as missing the point of why a classic thing is, well, "classic"
but like, exploring how Homestuck interacts with other older texts is not only totally reasonable, but probably essential to understanding it.
and those two arguments/intellectual exercises, while they do both fall under the umbrella of comparison, come from very different places, and are of very differing levels of merit.
i like the aesthetics of the past, and i respect its gravitas, but it doesn't speak to my soul
i do not have any particular positive feelings towards 'newness' or 'contemporaneity' as attributes, but i like it when someone tells me something interesting that i couldn't have thought up myself in a language that i speak
The thing is, while comparisons like that often have the nerd validation problem where something "needs" to be Art to be respected underlying them, the basic idea that Homestuck is more easily compared to a modernist or postmodernist experimental novel than it is to most other web-comics in terms of structure and relationship to itself strikes me as perfectly valid. That doesn't make it *as good as* a novel like Ulysses, or as historically important, but comparing the two makes more sense than it first would seem and diminishes neither, in my opinion.
It's similar to dismissing the idea that video games can be or are art. While there are plenty of people arguing the point in the wrong way, to the wrong people, for the wrong reasons, that doesn't invalidate the point.
well, if something has survived for an extended period of time, in the popular consciousness it means that:
1. it is presumably of a relatively high level of distinctiveness (*and ideally quality*)
2. other things have come up to responding to it artistically. art doenst exist in isolation, it exists in a dialogue with other things within the body of culture
so yeah, saying "Homestuck is the new [whatever classic thing]" would be patently ridiculous. any sort of comparisons in terms of what actually goes on in them aside, it generally comes across as missing the point of why a classic thing is, well, "classic"
but like, exploring how Homestuck interacts with other older texts is not only totally reasonable, but probably essential to understanding it.
and those two arguments/intellectual exercises, while they do both fall under the umbrella of comparison, come from very different places, and are of very differing levels of merit.
I completely agree and I should have made this clearer. Thank you, boo.
comparing Homestuck to Ulysses struck me as silly because, well, Homestuck is nothing like Ulysses
which the thing Odradek quoted pointed out, i just wanna note
I threw in Ulysses because it's come up before in that context. I happen to agree that Hussie bears less in common with Joyce than any of the other authors mentioned—although the fondness for grandiose portmanteau wordplay, dense recursive references and weird sex jokes is pretty Joycean.
i like the aesthetics of the past, and i respect its gravitas, but it doesn't speak to my soul
i do not have any particular positive feelings towards 'newness' or 'contemporaneity' as attributes, but i like it when someone tells me something interesting that i couldn't have thought up myself in a language that i speak
this is bs actually
a lot of old stuff feels very comfortable and warm to me, and i have knee-jerk predisposition against new things that became popular while i wasn't paying attention
Well yeah, it's also existed for seven years, it hasn't had much time to really spread its wings like Ulysses has
I dunno, I just can't not be super stoked that a sprawling epic about predestination and the wild divergence of human experience based on circumstance and numerous other esoteric complex topics is being read and understood by twelve year olds. I think finding out what exact modernist novel it REALLY compares to is intensely reductive, because Joyce and Hussie are both very, very much of their time.
Is Homestuck comparable to Finnegan's Wake? Who gives a dick, one of the longest English works in existence is written in a language that middle schoolers can easily understand. That's *wonderful.*
Is Homestuck comparable to Finnegan's Wake? Who gives a dick, one of the longest English works in existence is written in a language that middle schoolers can easily understand. That's *wonderful.*
Well yeah, it's also existed for seven years, it hasn't had much time to really spread its wings like Ulysses has
I dunno, I just can't not be super stoked that a sprawling epic about predestination and the wild divergence of human experience based on circumstance and numerous other esoteric complex topics is being read and understood by twelve year olds. I think finding out what exact modernist novel it REALLY compares to is intensely reductive, because Joyce and Hussie are both very, very much of their time.
That is an interesting point, Kex. i guess with that in mind maybe i took PBS Ideas Channel too much at face value, and the point they were actually making was maybe more similar to the 'dubstep drops are atonal music gone mainstream' argument they made in another video?
i guess, though, i actually do like experimental literature, at least some of it, so finding out which exact novels it more closely resembles in terms of ideas and themes is more interesting to me.
I've come to realize that when it comes to comparing new things to old ones, I generally have a strong preference for newer things. Or at least, that's the case for TV shows and games.
I think one of the main reasons for that preference is that I really, really dislike the idea of living in the past, to the point that I don't find reminiscing about the past by watching old home videos and looking at photo albums to be much fun at all. And I have a hard time accepting the idea that we as individuals are largely products of our pasts, (even if there is certainly some truth to it) mainly because I believe people have the potential to change and because I personally want to believe that I can become a better person.
All of that is not to say that people who enjoy classic works and generally prefer them to modern works are wrong. I don't think they are. I mean, there are definitely classic works I like (The Brothers Karamazov for example). I've just realized recently that I apparently have a pretty deep-seated preference for present/new stuff over past/classic stuff for whatever reason.
I sure as shit am still going to remember and care about Homestuck years down the line because it's important to me. And I think it's important to a lot of people who are going to continue caring about it and that's how classics are made.
The trajectory of the work moves from disorder to order, as random details (in many times actually random, or at least outside of authorial control, as most of the first part of the story was created with reader input) coalesce into an organized, logical, and rigidly-defined patterns and grids. The work itself is organized with a kind of code logic (which makes sense, considering Hussie studied computer science), which sorts disparate objects into groups and recalls them as necessary to close all ambiguities--a stark contrast to the ambiguous works that have dominated English literature for the past century. If ambiguity is an irreconcilable, even necessary aspect of modernist and postmodernist works, Hussie manages to use the very themes and techniques of modernism and postmodernism to stamp out ambiguity and create something surprisingly coherent.
I've come to realize that when it comes to comparing new things to old ones, I generally have a strong preference for newer things. Or at least, that's the case for TV shows and games.
I think one of the main reasons for that preference is that I really, really dislike the idea of living in the past, to the point that I don't find reminiscing about the past by watching old home videos and looking at photo albums to be much fun at all. And I have a hard time accepting the idea that we as individuals are largely products of our pasts, (even if there is certainly some truth to it) mainly because I believe people have the potential to change and because I personally want to believe that I can become a better person.
All of that is not to say that people who enjoy classic works and generally prefer them to modern works are wrong. I don't think they are. I mean, there are definitely classic works I like (The Brothers Karamazov for example). I've just realized recently that I apparently have a pretty deep-seated preference for present/new stuff over past/classic stuff for whatever reason.
I have similar sentiments, as much as I also love stuff from the past. My feeling is that it's better to give precedence to new things, and to celebrate the renewal that each step forward represents. This applies to mediums just as much as individual works of art; that things like webcomics or video games even exist is something I find very positive, as they represent entirely new vectors of both expression and internal thought process.
Comments
pffft ha ha ha i was just kinda musing there about reasons why Homestuck feels out of place when compared to canonical literature, which it kinda does to me, 'it's a comedy' was something that came to mind, i.e. you can't really take it seriously, but then i said it seemed like a superficial reason, which it is
there *is* a tendency in critical circles to differentiate between 'literature' and 'genre fiction', but actually i think critics are more receptive to comedic elements than they are to e.g. sentimentality, in any case
well, I didn't mean to.
bad with metaphors
afaik
A long time ago, I read something where somebody (can't remember who) said "in America, whatever is new is automatically considered good and whatever is old is suspect. In Britain it is the opposite." Now that may be bullshit for all I know. But it got me thinking about something: instinctively favoring what is new and novel vs. instinctively favoring what is established and "classic". I think I tend to fall on the latter side of that line. So maybe I am a grognard. Although I don't play D&D. But yeah, that's why stuff like "Homestuck is the new Ulysses" kinda irks me, because you don't get to be considered a great classic thing immediately. Time doesn't allow it; She's a bit more picky than that.
Actually, I think that fear of Time is part of why I like things with "classic" status; they've managed to survive while Time has been destroying everything else left and right. Gives a sense (somewhat an illusion, but whatever) of permanence.
i do not have any particular positive feelings towards 'newness' or 'contemporaneity' as attributes, but i like it when someone tells me something interesting that i couldn't have thought up myself in a language that i speak
something's changed, maybe
It's similar to dismissing the idea that video games can be or are art. While there are plenty of people arguing the point in the wrong way, to the wrong people, for the wrong reasons, that doesn't invalidate the point.
which the thing Odradek quoted pointed out, i just wanna note
Not gonna deny that
of course homestuck has had less impact. i mean, it's a webcomic.
the idea of preferencing the new is if anything more repugnant to me than preferencing the old, but both feel quite arbitrary
a lot of old stuff feels very comfortable and warm to me, and i have knee-jerk predisposition against new things that became popular while i wasn't paying attention
I dunno, I just can't not be super stoked that a sprawling epic about predestination and the wild divergence of human experience based on circumstance and numerous other esoteric complex topics is being read and understood by twelve year olds. I think finding out what exact modernist novel it REALLY compares to is intensely reductive, because Joyce and Hussie are both very, very much of their time.
That is an interesting point, Kex. i guess with that in mind maybe i took PBS Ideas Channel too much at face value, and the point they were actually making was maybe more similar to the 'dubstep drops are atonal music gone mainstream' argument they made in another video?
i guess, though, i actually do like experimental literature, at least some of it, so finding out which exact novels it more closely resembles in terms of ideas and themes is more interesting to me.
I think one of the main reasons for that preference is that I really, really dislike the idea of living in the past, to the point that I don't find reminiscing about the past by watching old home videos and looking at photo albums to be much fun at all. And I have a hard time accepting the idea that we as individuals are largely products of our pasts, (even if there is certainly some truth to it) mainly because I believe people have the potential to change and because I personally want to believe that I can become a better person.
All of that is not to say that people who enjoy classic works and generally prefer them to modern works are wrong. I don't think they are. I mean, there are definitely classic works I like (The Brothers Karamazov for example). I've just realized recently that I apparently have a pretty deep-seated preference for present/new stuff over past/classic stuff for whatever reason.
Point is, as meaningful as those comparisons are, they say very little-maybe even nothing- about the quality or importance of either work.
And, that is true.