C
caraculo
Hi guyz.
I have read several books of CB, and I was curious about what other people could think about his work.
So I've been reading reviews in Amazon, and discovered several patterns, that I'd like to comment with you, CB fans.
Overall, his work has a very black or white nature: people either love him or hate him.
Most rates were positive (3 to 5 stars). His fans often praised his honesty, his commitment to an ideal; his prose is like a punch on the face, like a morning hangover, like a crude awakening to life; his manly style sober and elegant.
But I was surprised at the viscerality of those who rated his works one star. I wont quote the comments I found there (you can check them yourselves if you are interested), but basically came to say CB was a monotonous, boring, agressive, fustrated misogynist who just wanted his fair 5 minutes of attention and wanted the rest of the world to vouyer his emptiness.
So all that confrontationality stroke me as odd, there's not many authors who get so black and white criticism, such a wide and deep abyss between fans and detractors.
So I guess I am in the right place to ask why?
Thanks.
PS:
Of course some books were more confrontational than others. Ham in Rye and his poems were highly praised, meanwhile Pulp, Women, and some of his short stories collections were the most bashed.
PS2:
I noticed as well that there were some sort of social status clash among fans and detractors.
In many a time, detractors were deemed as "conservative suburban middle-up class" type of people, or soccer moms who read Dan Brown novels.
I think that was very interesting, do you think there's a profile of the average CB fan, as far as social status, or lifestyle is concerned?
I have read several books of CB, and I was curious about what other people could think about his work.
So I've been reading reviews in Amazon, and discovered several patterns, that I'd like to comment with you, CB fans.
Overall, his work has a very black or white nature: people either love him or hate him.
Most rates were positive (3 to 5 stars). His fans often praised his honesty, his commitment to an ideal; his prose is like a punch on the face, like a morning hangover, like a crude awakening to life; his manly style sober and elegant.
But I was surprised at the viscerality of those who rated his works one star. I wont quote the comments I found there (you can check them yourselves if you are interested), but basically came to say CB was a monotonous, boring, agressive, fustrated misogynist who just wanted his fair 5 minutes of attention and wanted the rest of the world to vouyer his emptiness.
So all that confrontationality stroke me as odd, there's not many authors who get so black and white criticism, such a wide and deep abyss between fans and detractors.
So I guess I am in the right place to ask why?
Thanks.
PS:
Of course some books were more confrontational than others. Ham in Rye and his poems were highly praised, meanwhile Pulp, Women, and some of his short stories collections were the most bashed.
PS2:
I noticed as well that there were some sort of social status clash among fans and detractors.
In many a time, detractors were deemed as "conservative suburban middle-up class" type of people, or soccer moms who read Dan Brown novels.
I think that was very interesting, do you think there's a profile of the average CB fan, as far as social status, or lifestyle is concerned?