Trying to see what Green says of this novelist before Google Books tells me the preview is over

I ordered another one of Green’s books off amazon just now, so for another day probably. Is this genre really the dirty secret of literature? Dudes bein’ dudes, pretty much? The modern Homer? That’s the first I’ve heard that one. If that writer DID exist they probably wouldn’t want you to know about him.

That other adventure writer Green mentions, who I never heard of, Buchan, has a biography on Scott.

I wonder if there’s political reasons for this, Green seems to think there is

Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) was a household name in the nineteenth century; once an immensely popular writer, he is now largely forgotten.

He was prolific so I’m just trying to get a general overview of his books – he has five volumes on Napoleon alone, outside of his extensive novels. You’ve probably heard of Ivanhoe? Most of his novels aren’t set in the 12th century like that one.

Here is the chronology of what are known as the Waverley novels written between 1814-1832

Waverley was a pseudonym he used, people didn’t know he was writing them at the time. He was one of the most popular writers in Europe for a century, and now apparently he’s a dirty secret? He was writing just across the North Sea from his contemporary Goethe, and 300 or so miles North by land of his other contemporary Jane Austen.

I try not to take the internet for granted, because it was so easy to find a book that begins this way

In the context of my last post, I keep reflecting on how you can’t trust anything anyone has to say about anything if they’re a sell-out. Nonetheless, I’m going to trust this 2017 secondary for now, even though I highly doubt it will be as direct as that 90s study I was drawing from. This is a serious problem of culture, that everyone’s so one with the hive that you can’t trust them to tell the truth. They always have to give it a hive-slant, if not say the exact opposite of what reality is, the latter of which is what the hive prefers.

Nationalists for instance have found valuable insight in Scott. Green surprised me in framing his study in part based on the “nation-building” theme of many of the old adventure novels. And if you remember the theme of violence, the friend-enemy distinction seems prominent. It’s funny to realize I’m saying this to my enemy humanity.

Keep your head down, take your kids to Disneyworld, that seems to be what life’s about. “That’s better than being a pariah critic!” Questionable. I always find solace in concluding that humanity’s slothfulness is something neurological and out of anyone’s control. The objects can only alchemize into spirit very slowly.

Huh so anyway, both the definition of what interests Grug and Grugette, adventure and romance, as exemplified in Scott and Austen, are let us say anti-modern and not in harmony with the standard way of thinking today. That’s called deprivation to the core of our culture’s being. Can’t believe I bother for you hive-clowns. No one truly believes in anything it seems.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: