This book sounds nauseating. Thank you for your service.
It would be interesting to see a piece expanding on your experience with Houellebecq. He is not only my favorite living writer, but one of the very few of those whom I can respect--despite the steady decline of his work in terms of cutting cultural commentary. He is certainly fixated upon weak men, but unlike Castro (it would seem), he addresses the PROBLEM of weak men head-on, deliberately, as a symptom of cultural and moral decline. It is no secret that most of his protagonists are based more or less loosely upon his own personality; from reading his commentary, though, it is clear that he disgusts himself.
I see. Most of his books are about perverts. Whatever, Submission, and The Map & the Territory are (mostly) not. Elementary Particles is easily his strongest. Submission is easily his weakest. You’ve tasted him at his best and worst.
I’ve thought a lot about this. How much of the critique of this retarded millennial novel is just a critique of modernity? The word we’re lacking here is “abject.” The protagonists of Ulysses are (respectively) a young, pretentious whoring baby alcoholic (Stephen Dedalus) and a canny, entertaining semi-willing cuckold (Bloom). Jake Barnes (Hemingway) is literally impotent. Gatsby is the ultimate reply guy. So where are we then?
If I have interpreted your point correctly—that modernity is the driver of this kind of immature childishness among some men—I ultimately disagree (respectfully). There are a lot of people, especially conservatives, who believe this thesis, and I think there is clearly correlation between florid and grotesque expressions of pathetic behavior and modernity, but there are also just a lot more living people now than ever. My working thesis is largely progressive-materialist: capitalism and technology have produced enormous abundance and stability; meanwhile, the extremely thorough Christianization of western morality has created situation in which societies can and even insist upon supporting, affirming, and protecting unproductive, insane, criminal, perverted, etc people because it costs very little, relative to the past, and both elites and the masses largely believe in protecting the vulnerable (“And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.”) The context for this poop-obsessed man-child is the triumph of Christianity, I think.
I should further clarify: all of that said, there are huge numbers of people who are sane and normal and productive—more than ever—and they are living by traditional, tribal folkways, iPhone in hand. That’s my thesis anyway.
There’s a lot going on here. I think the idea that Christianity + capitalism can absorb at a low cost lots of negative externalities is not wrong (though it’s constantly bumping up against limits). I guess what I’m fixating on here is the understandable desire for (lack of a better word) “normies” in fiction, and how this is interrelated with “modernity” and identity formation within industrialized, consumerist societies. Very rapidly (and definitely by the 1940s or so) the avenues for BAP-style piratical self-actualization are a thing of the past. This is what Ulysses is about of course (non-heroic heroes, the closing of that horizon) and even into mid-century stuff like Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom, who is in some sense what you define as a local “big man,” but he’s still riven by doubts and insecurities about his shifting place in the world. I guess I agree insofar as a writer like Castro just *assumes* the aesthetic value or purposiveness of abjection without earning it.
I think in popular culture, you do see heteronormative characters—strong men, feminine women: think Michael Bay, James Cameron, etc. It’s just the small slice of Americans who read literary fiction that want kind of a reverse formula: realistic storyworld with fantasy social organization.
Regarding my claim about Christianity and capitalism: I don’t mean that in some libertarian/Ronald Reagan sense; I mean that pre-Christian peoples, as far as I understand, many times have animalistic moral ideas. The “least of these My brethren” concept is basically a Christian contribution to humanity. I’m persuaded by the thesis that we have a number of variants of Christianity run amok in America. Some of these variants happen to be secular, but they are Christian in nature.
Yeah, the whole “woke is actually Protestant Christianity” is probably not untrue on its face. But I would advise looking up early 20th century Progressive folks like Randolph Bourne. There’s a deep Anglo-American progressive thing underlying that isn’t naturally present in, say, French, Italian, German, et al culture. Maybe it attaches to all cultural/military hegemons idk.
Thanks for reminding me why i never read modern fiction!
Nietzsche's Last Man is far too neurotic to be any kind of substantial artist, the Last Man at most can gnaw his tail, chew off some fur, maybe arrange it in a neat pile, but he'll never know the world outside his zoo enclosure.
I really feel for the poor stranded manchildren of the internet age, they're locked in a virtual labyrinth where they know nothing but their own curated reflections (and their crippling anxiety about their curated reflections) that makes Plato's Cave look like a mountain top. How can you create anything when the most you've ever risked in life is a racy retweet?!
Appreciate your work, but I'll be happily getting back to some Nabokov.
I found this quite interesting. I would have liked to push Tony more, but it was via email format and I sent the questions ahead of time, so no follow up. I didn't quite agree with his answer to the masculinity question.
My new novel, which I hope will see the light of day, is told from the perspective of a Trump-supporting Midwestern pastor, so I am very curious to see if it passes muster with a Trump-supporting reader.
I don’t blame you. Because masculinity is social, there are different expectations of masculinity. Mine is tacked roughly to working class outer-borough ethnic white Catholics, though I think blacks and Hispanics largely have a similar paradigm. I do think the tribal “big man” is worth considering in this conversation.
Well, I have literally grown up and live among the working class outer borough ethnic white Catholics of Brooklyn; you have described my childhood. I have fondness for them, if they're much more anti-Semitic than the Protestants I've encountered.
Very thorough. My eyes couldn’t stop glazing over enough to read the book as closely as you have. Castro seems like an alright dude and not someone I necessarily wanted to “take down” either. I hope he can better his craft so I can give him a better review someday.
This book sounds nauseating. Thank you for your service.
It would be interesting to see a piece expanding on your experience with Houellebecq. He is not only my favorite living writer, but one of the very few of those whom I can respect--despite the steady decline of his work in terms of cutting cultural commentary. He is certainly fixated upon weak men, but unlike Castro (it would seem), he addresses the PROBLEM of weak men head-on, deliberately, as a symptom of cultural and moral decline. It is no secret that most of his protagonists are based more or less loosely upon his own personality; from reading his commentary, though, it is clear that he disgusts himself.
I’ve only read Submission and Elementary Particles. It’s mostly the latter that makes me think of him as writing about perverts.
I see. Most of his books are about perverts. Whatever, Submission, and The Map & the Territory are (mostly) not. Elementary Particles is easily his strongest. Submission is easily his weakest. You’ve tasted him at his best and worst.
I’ve thought a lot about this. How much of the critique of this retarded millennial novel is just a critique of modernity? The word we’re lacking here is “abject.” The protagonists of Ulysses are (respectively) a young, pretentious whoring baby alcoholic (Stephen Dedalus) and a canny, entertaining semi-willing cuckold (Bloom). Jake Barnes (Hemingway) is literally impotent. Gatsby is the ultimate reply guy. So where are we then?
If I have interpreted your point correctly—that modernity is the driver of this kind of immature childishness among some men—I ultimately disagree (respectfully). There are a lot of people, especially conservatives, who believe this thesis, and I think there is clearly correlation between florid and grotesque expressions of pathetic behavior and modernity, but there are also just a lot more living people now than ever. My working thesis is largely progressive-materialist: capitalism and technology have produced enormous abundance and stability; meanwhile, the extremely thorough Christianization of western morality has created situation in which societies can and even insist upon supporting, affirming, and protecting unproductive, insane, criminal, perverted, etc people because it costs very little, relative to the past, and both elites and the masses largely believe in protecting the vulnerable (“And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.”) The context for this poop-obsessed man-child is the triumph of Christianity, I think.
I should further clarify: all of that said, there are huge numbers of people who are sane and normal and productive—more than ever—and they are living by traditional, tribal folkways, iPhone in hand. That’s my thesis anyway.
There’s a lot going on here. I think the idea that Christianity + capitalism can absorb at a low cost lots of negative externalities is not wrong (though it’s constantly bumping up against limits). I guess what I’m fixating on here is the understandable desire for (lack of a better word) “normies” in fiction, and how this is interrelated with “modernity” and identity formation within industrialized, consumerist societies. Very rapidly (and definitely by the 1940s or so) the avenues for BAP-style piratical self-actualization are a thing of the past. This is what Ulysses is about of course (non-heroic heroes, the closing of that horizon) and even into mid-century stuff like Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom, who is in some sense what you define as a local “big man,” but he’s still riven by doubts and insecurities about his shifting place in the world. I guess I agree insofar as a writer like Castro just *assumes* the aesthetic value or purposiveness of abjection without earning it.
I think in popular culture, you do see heteronormative characters—strong men, feminine women: think Michael Bay, James Cameron, etc. It’s just the small slice of Americans who read literary fiction that want kind of a reverse formula: realistic storyworld with fantasy social organization.
Regarding my claim about Christianity and capitalism: I don’t mean that in some libertarian/Ronald Reagan sense; I mean that pre-Christian peoples, as far as I understand, many times have animalistic moral ideas. The “least of these My brethren” concept is basically a Christian contribution to humanity. I’m persuaded by the thesis that we have a number of variants of Christianity run amok in America. Some of these variants happen to be secular, but they are Christian in nature.
Yeah, the whole “woke is actually Protestant Christianity” is probably not untrue on its face. But I would advise looking up early 20th century Progressive folks like Randolph Bourne. There’s a deep Anglo-American progressive thing underlying that isn’t naturally present in, say, French, Italian, German, et al culture. Maybe it attaches to all cultural/military hegemons idk.
Thanks for reminding me why i never read modern fiction!
Nietzsche's Last Man is far too neurotic to be any kind of substantial artist, the Last Man at most can gnaw his tail, chew off some fur, maybe arrange it in a neat pile, but he'll never know the world outside his zoo enclosure.
I really feel for the poor stranded manchildren of the internet age, they're locked in a virtual labyrinth where they know nothing but their own curated reflections (and their crippling anxiety about their curated reflections) that makes Plato's Cave look like a mountain top. How can you create anything when the most you've ever risked in life is a racy retweet?!
Appreciate your work, but I'll be happily getting back to some Nabokov.
Cheers!
I found this quite interesting. I would have liked to push Tony more, but it was via email format and I sent the questions ahead of time, so no follow up. I didn't quite agree with his answer to the masculinity question.
My new novel, which I hope will see the light of day, is told from the perspective of a Trump-supporting Midwestern pastor, so I am very curious to see if it passes muster with a Trump-supporting reader.
I don’t blame you. Because masculinity is social, there are different expectations of masculinity. Mine is tacked roughly to working class outer-borough ethnic white Catholics, though I think blacks and Hispanics largely have a similar paradigm. I do think the tribal “big man” is worth considering in this conversation.
Well, I have literally grown up and live among the working class outer borough ethnic white Catholics of Brooklyn; you have described my childhood. I have fondness for them, if they're much more anti-Semitic than the Protestants I've encountered.
Very thorough. My eyes couldn’t stop glazing over enough to read the book as closely as you have. Castro seems like an alright dude and not someone I necessarily wanted to “take down” either. I hope he can better his craft so I can give him a better review someday.
I completely agree with you. I feel bad, but I also just kind of couldn’t believe what I was reading.