<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Books I&#8217;ll never read</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:56:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Arie Altena</title>
		<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11821</link>
		<dc:creator>Arie Altena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2006 19:56:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11821</guid>
		<description>@j rg n : I guess it has someting to do with a naivite in Foers characters (but also of the story) that to me comes across as well, not fake, but maybe evading some real issues... (of course I can't really say, not having read his latest till end...). It also has something to do with his 'mainstreamy', readable use of postmodern tricks -- that I should like, seen my taste for radical and experimental forms of fiction, but that I do exactly not really like in Foer, or in David Mitchell, for that matter. Hmmm. Whereas both are (also in my opinion) amongst the more important contemporary writers.

The only attempt at a critique of Foer that I know of &#038; sort of sympatise with is Dirk van Weeldens review that appeared in the NRC a few months ago. He might not have been totally 'fair' (writing wilfully a comtroversial review to get a discussion between readers going), but it made sense to me: http://www.nrc.nl/krant/article215617.ece/Echte_moeilijke_vragen_blijven_buiten_schot</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@j rg n : I guess it has someting to do with a naivite in Foers characters (but also of the story) that to me comes across as well, not fake, but maybe evading some real issues&#8230; (of course I can&#8217;t really say, not having read his latest till end&#8230;). It also has something to do with his &#8216;mainstreamy&#8217;, readable use of postmodern tricks &#8212; that I should like, seen my taste for radical and experimental forms of fiction, but that I do exactly not really like in Foer, or in David Mitchell, for that matter. Hmmm. Whereas both are (also in my opinion) amongst the more important contemporary writers.</p>
<p>The only attempt at a critique of Foer that I know of &#038; sort of sympatise with is Dirk van Weeldens review that appeared in the NRC a few months ago. He might not have been totally &#8216;fair&#8217; (writing wilfully a comtroversial review to get a discussion between readers going), but it made sense to me: <a href="http://www.nrc.nl/krant/article215617.ece/Echte_moeilijke_vragen_blijven_buiten_schot" rel="nofollow">http://www.nrc.nl/krant/article215617.ece/Echte_moeilijke_vragen_blijven_buiten_schot</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: j rg n</title>
		<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11418</link>
		<dc:creator>j rg n</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:37:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11418</guid>
		<description>Maybe the books' childlike naivite and hopefulness bother you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe the books&#8217; childlike naivite and hopefulness bother you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J RG N</title>
		<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11417</link>
		<dc:creator>J RG N</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11417</guid>
		<description>I'm surprised you both find Foer's novels sentimental, cause I think one of the main strengths of both books (Foer's remarkable talent) is that these very emotional subjects are presented without the story becoming sentimental, grave, humourless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised you both find Foer&#8217;s novels sentimental, cause I think one of the main strengths of both books (Foer&#8217;s remarkable talent) is that these very emotional subjects are presented without the story becoming sentimental, grave, humourless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Omar</title>
		<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11178</link>
		<dc:creator>Omar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11178</guid>
		<description>Well, there's always more to it. ;) I just know I don't like precocious &#38; sullen characters, except Holden Caulfield, the one they all want to emulate, don't you think?

Strange that you didn't finish Karamazov, that was a typical "sneltreinvaart" read for me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, there&#8217;s always more to it. ;) I just know I don&#8217;t like precocious &amp; sullen characters, except Holden Caulfield, the one they all want to emulate, don&#8217;t you think?</p>
<p>Strange that you didn&#8217;t finish Karamazov, that was a typical &#8220;sneltreinvaart&#8221; read for me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arie Altena</title>
		<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11174</link>
		<dc:creator>Arie Altena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:44:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11174</guid>
		<description>:) when I remember well, you also did not like David Mitchell's books.... I think there's more to it: 'good' storystelling + sentimentality + use of let's say 'postmodern' tropes &#038; tricks -- that particular mix seems to turn me off, at least...

Ah, waiting for the Pynchon...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>:) when I remember well, you also did not like David Mitchell&#8217;s books&#8230;. I think there&#8217;s more to it: &#8216;good&#8217; storystelling + sentimentality + use of let&#8217;s say &#8216;postmodern&#8217; tropes &#038; tricks &#8212; that particular mix seems to turn me off, at least&#8230;</p>
<p>Ah, waiting for the Pynchon&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Omar</title>
		<link>http://ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11147</link>
		<dc:creator>Omar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 14:57:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ariealt.net/blog/2006/11/21/books-ill-never-read/#comment-11147</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;I can stand Richard Powers’ bordering on sentimentality. Why not Foer’s?&lt;/i&gt;

It's those too-wise-for-their-age brat(s). (I gave up on both his books after two chapters. And I almost never give up on books :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>I can stand Richard Powers’ bordering on sentimentality. Why not Foer’s?</i></p>
<p>It&#8217;s those too-wise-for-their-age brat(s). (I gave up on both his books after two chapters. And I almost never give up on books :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
