http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/ the internet literature magazine blog of the future Fri, 25 May 2012 01:40:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/comment-page-1/#comment-72844 Fajar Tue, 18 May 2010 10:01:40 +0000 http://htmlgiant.com/?p=19505#comment-72844 Great post.The best advice I can give to anyone,lucy Great post.The best advice I can give to anyone,lucy

]]> http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/comment-page-1/#comment-127456 Fajar Tue, 18 May 2010 10:01:00 +0000 http://htmlgiant.com/?p=19505#comment-127456 Great post.The best advice I can give to anyone,lucy Great post.The best advice I can give to anyone,lucy

]]> http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/comment-page-1/#comment-40198 Richard Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:52:21 +0000 http://htmlgiant.com/?p=19505#comment-40198 I just skimmed this article, but will read it later, as a long time King fan. Glad to hear your comments Kyle, as a lot of people bash King, but I think he's a great storyteller. I just skimmed this article, but will read it later, as a long time King fan. Glad to hear your comments Kyle, as a lot of people bash King, but I think he’s a great storyteller.

]]> http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/comment-page-1/#comment-127455 Richard Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:52:00 +0000 http://htmlgiant.com/?p=19505#comment-127455 I just skimmed this article, but will read it later, as a long time King fan. Glad to hear your comments Kyle, as a lot of people bash King, but I think he's a great storyteller. I just skimmed this article, but will read it later, as a long time King fan. Glad to hear your comments Kyle, as a lot of people bash King, but I think he’s a great storyteller.

]]> http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/comment-page-1/#comment-40152 Kyle Minor Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:04:29 +0000 http://htmlgiant.com/?p=19505#comment-40152 Stephen King is increasingly interesting as a human being. I'm glad he wrote this review, and I'm glad to hear him think aloud about Raymond Carver. I wish the review had been more engaged with Carver's work on its own terms, absent talk about Carver's wives or editors or his drinking. I would have enjoyed hearing Stephen King's close reading of Cathedral or Errand or Are These Actual Miles? I think Carver is King's opposite in many ways (the minimal v. the maximal, the disparity in attention to the individual sentence, the quiet story v. the rip-roarer, etc.), but I also think that Carver and King are interested in a similar kind of character, often, and have a similar conversation with violence in their work which gets literal play (often metaphorized) in Carver and metaphorical play (often literalized) in King. After reading King's writing on writing, I thought Carver would be a writer whose work might appeal to King, and I'm pleased to see how the admiration shows through in the Times review. Stephen King is increasingly interesting as a human being. I’m glad he wrote this review, and I’m glad to hear him think aloud about Raymond Carver. I wish the review had been more engaged with Carver’s work on its own terms, absent talk about Carver’s wives or editors or his drinking. I would have enjoyed hearing Stephen King’s close reading of Cathedral or Errand or Are These Actual Miles? I think Carver is King’s opposite in many ways (the minimal v. the maximal, the disparity in attention to the individual sentence, the quiet story v. the rip-roarer, etc.), but I also think that Carver and King are interested in a similar kind of character, often, and have a similar conversation with violence in their work which gets literal play (often metaphorized) in Carver and metaphorical play (often literalized) in King. After reading King’s writing on writing, I thought Carver would be a writer whose work might appeal to King, and I’m pleased to see how the admiration shows through in the Times review.

]]> http://htmlgiant.com/snippet/19505/comment-page-1/#comment-127454 Kyle Minor Sat, 21 Nov 2009 07:04:00 +0000 http://htmlgiant.com/?p=19505#comment-127454 Stephen King is increasingly interesting as a human being. I'm glad he wrote this review, and I'm glad to hear him think aloud about Raymond Carver. I wish the review had been more engaged with Carver's work on its own terms, absent talk about Carver's wives or editors or his drinking. I would have enjoyed hearing Stephen King's close reading of Cathedral or Errand or Are These Actual Miles? I think Carver is King's opposite in many ways (the minimal v. the maximal, the disparity in attention to the individual sentence, the quiet story v. the rip-roarer, etc.), but I also think that Carver and King are interested in a similar kind of character, often, and have a similar conversation with violence in their work which gets literal play (often metaphorized) in Carver and metaphorical play (often literalized) in King. After reading King's writing on writing, I thought Carver would be a writer whose work might appeal to King, and I'm pleased to see how the admiration shows through in the Times review. Stephen King is increasingly interesting as a human being. I’m glad he wrote this review, and I’m glad to hear him think aloud about Raymond Carver. I wish the review had been more engaged with Carver’s work on its own terms, absent talk about Carver’s wives or editors or his drinking. I would have enjoyed hearing Stephen King’s close reading of Cathedral or Errand or Are These Actual Miles? I think Carver is King’s opposite in many ways (the minimal v. the maximal, the disparity in attention to the individual sentence, the quiet story v. the rip-roarer, etc.), but I also think that Carver and King are interested in a similar kind of character, often, and have a similar conversation with violence in their work which gets literal play (often metaphorized) in Carver and metaphorical play (often literalized) in King. After reading King’s writing on writing, I thought Carver would be a writer whose work might appeal to King, and I’m pleased to see how the admiration shows through in the Times review.

]]>