Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

celebratedrecluse wrote

Reply to comment by rot in by !deleted8445

I think that perhaps he will find the courage to take to his breast the legacy he has made under his pen name, if he was ever worth thinking about in the first place.

So far, it reminds me of the way Louie dicked out of dealing with his demons. Basically makes the whole legacy forgettable, renders less artistic the body of work, for not interrogating masculinity. But it's unreasonable to expect most famous men to be capable of such a fundamental task lol

3

rot wrote

I don't think it's totally unreasonable to ask that someone stick to the ideals they preach. It's the last thing I would've expected from his persona.

don't know about Louie tho, he's didn't build his career on being an anarchist writer like bone's did

1

celebratedrecluse wrote

It's the last thing I would've expected from his persona.

He wrote a neo-gonzo essay about the thrills of drunk driving. Was it so unreasonable to think they might manipulate their partners, and do sexual misconduct, if it gratified their repressed desires and felt liberating (to them) in the moment?

To me, it's all part of the same monologue. Theoretically it's massively contradictory, but what radical isn't at least a little contradictory? Isn't that the nature of radicality, its internal dissonance, the distance between what could be and what currently is? And what is bones' aesthetic but an acceleration, a reflection of this certain persona, which is enthralling to more of us reading this than just myself?

There's something to wrestle with here. Not just for bones, but for the rest of us.

3

[deleted] wrote

0

celebratedrecluse wrote

He hasn't yet, which is fucking ludicrous, and which he also can't undo-- dead time, this kills the comedy

1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

1

celebratedrecluse wrote

He's gotta do a good job of it in the next year, at the least. Wouldnt you agree?

1

[deleted] wrote

−1

celebratedrecluse wrote

Sure, I concur, but to me both are important. He wields extraordinary power and influence within media due to his position, he had/has the opportunity to leave one kind of imprint or another on a cultural space, and the timing is significant to that if we look at the social dimension: how will this be retransmitted?

But I think it's true what you say, it does matter more how he deals with it, than the time frame in which he does it.

1