A friend (a fellow enjoyer of "A Song of Ice and Fire") shared an article that compared GRRM's writing with Marquis de Sade's. suffice it to say, as shocking as it is to learn such a comparison, I am nonetheless intrigued, enough so that I did some more research on the man whom I know only for being the source of SM. lol. And frankly, even after my research and try my best to be objective, I still couldn't really understand why on earth would the works of that guy be regarded as anything but pulp fiction. lol. Seriously, I enjoy a good smut from time to time but what that guy wrote was just a bit too much(if Pasolini's “Salo" is any indication to what it actually was like)
The only plausible explanation I can think of why people even bother to evaluate his works as some form of "literature" is likely because it was written in the past, and hence, at least, it can reveal the depraved mind of aristocrats back then. lol. And its ages prevented it from being labelled as complete trash.
In a hundred or two hundred years, stories that we read of currently would become ancient relics. So what are some bad ones that you'd wager later historians and critics would regard as hidden gems? lol
I'd wager "Twilight" would for sure become one of the favourites of the critics in a hundred years to come, since chances are, even if it was(is and still likely would be regarded so in the future) bad in terms of writing and plot, critics could still say that "at least it can help us understand the mentality of Mormons through the analysis of why Edward is so unwilling to have sex with Bella until marriage". lol
(seriously I never ever knew the author's religion before but now that I know of this, many of the things that make no sense in the book for sure make a great deal of sense now)
[link] [comments]