..and what everyone seems to not realise about Kanye is that bipolar really does make you say crazy things. I know because my beloved son has the condition. He is well now because he has the right meds. But I remember him telling us when he was in a less controlled state, that we must build an underground Bat Cave (as in Batman) and get my sister in law to design it (as she’s great at interior design). This was dropped into normal conversation. So really with Kanye, I suspect he’s just off his meds, and it’s not fair to draw conclusions about his views based on what he says in those circumstances. I may be wrong though, as obviously I don’t know that.
Caroline Ayers
1 year ago
..and what everyone seems to not realise about Kanye is that bipolar really does make you say crazy things. I know because my beloved son has the condition. He is well now because he has the right meds. But I remember him telling us when he was in a less controlled state, that we must build an underground Bat Cave (as in Batman) and get my sister in law to design it (as she’s great at interior design). This was dropped into normal conversation. So really with Kanye, I suspect he’s just off his meds, and it’s not fair to draw conclusions about his views based on what he says in those circumstances. I may be wrong though, as obviously I don’t know that.
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
‘‘All three of them said they had never read a novel. I said, I don’t know what you mean. You’re all college graduates. How is that possible? Oh, yeah, they told me, we were assigned novels. We just did our essays from articles on the internet. We have never read a novel.”
Yea, well just look at what has been written since this writer and his ilk took over. I would not read any of this drek either – no wonder even he mentions the Classics with reverence. 1980s was pretty much the last gasp of literature and art; 1990s the death rattle, 2000s, the coroner was wheeling the industry of book writing off to be buried – no one felt an autopsy was needed as smoking guns and bloody knives and garrote ropes and bottles of poison were covering the floor.
And the label on the poison bottles read:
Post Modernism, situational ethics, relative morals, elastic code of honour, and confused genders……
yes, well, as has society as a whole. Once the Bible was totally replaced with youtube, facebook, instagram, and finally tick-toc and only-fans; as the source of understanding of ultimate ,the world was taken by ‘The Lord of the Flies’ (which is an old name for Beelzebub)
Or maybe it was the explosion at the start of the 1980s of American consumer culture, you know era of mass produced crap, big brands, killing originality. Media increasingly wanting stuff they can brand and package etc. Big brands squeezing out smaller competitors. Music industry has become similar. Not to do with the bible so much, if anything surely the Internet made it easier to ‘spread the word’?
I grew up in the 70s and 80s and don’t recall those times as a cultural wonderland, even in contrast to now. Nor was the Bible, in my recollection, held in general reverence, either in letter or spirit (not that it has in fact been “replaced” with social media).
Are you referring to specific cultural conditions or artistic output in the 80s and before, in literature and music, or just in WF Buckley’s memorable quip: “standing athwart history, yelling ‘stop!'”?. I thought much 80s music was heartless and lame, though some of it holds up and now it’s old enough to be called classic, at least for marketing purposes.
Some of us think that even nostalgia’s not as good as it used to be. Can you name some of the great art and literature that constituted this purported last gasp?
Or maybe it was the explosion at the start of the 1980s of American consumer culture, you know era of mass produced crap, big brands, killing originality. Media increasingly wanting stuff they can brand and package etc. Big brands squeezing out smaller competitors. Music industry has become similar. Not to do with the bible so much, if anything surely the Internet made it easier to ‘spread the word’?
I grew up in the 70s and 80s and don’t recall those times as a cultural wonderland, even in contrast to now. Nor was the Bible, in my recollection, held in general reverence, either in letter or spirit (not that it has in fact been “replaced” with social media).
Are you referring to specific cultural conditions or artistic output in the 80s and before, in literature and music, or just in WF Buckley’s memorable quip: “standing athwart history, yelling ‘stop!'”?. I thought much 80s music was heartless and lame, though some of it holds up and now it’s old enough to be called classic, at least for marketing purposes.
Some of us think that even nostalgia’s not as good as it used to be. Can you name some of the great art and literature that constituted this purported last gasp?
yes, well, as has society as a whole. Once the Bible was totally replaced with youtube, facebook, instagram, and finally tick-toc and only-fans; as the source of understanding of ultimate ,the world was taken by ‘The Lord of the Flies’ (which is an old name for Beelzebub)
Rock and pop music and movies have also been dead in the water these last couple of decades as well
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
‘‘All three of them said they had never read a novel. I said, I don’t know what you mean. You’re all college graduates. How is that possible? Oh, yeah, they told me, we were assigned novels. We just did our essays from articles on the internet. We have never read a novel.”
Yea, well just look at what has been written since this writer and his ilk took over. I would not read any of this drek either – no wonder even he mentions the Classics with reverence. 1980s was pretty much the last gasp of literature and art; 1990s the death rattle, 2000s, the coroner was wheeling the industry of book writing off to be buried – no one felt an autopsy was needed as smoking guns and bloody knives and garrote ropes and bottles of poison were covering the floor.
And the label on the poison bottles read:
Post Modernism, situational ethics, relative morals, elastic code of honour, and confused genders……
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
I think part of the reason why Gen X is the most conservative of the generations — much more than boomers, much more than millennials — is that we had the most freedom. We looked to be shocked. We wanted to be offended. We loved dirty jokes. We loved music.
As a Gen X-er this resonated with me. I don’t really like dividing generations into ‘groups’, but from my own teenage perspective of the 1990s, it really was a great time to be young. My becoming more conservative has nothing to do with wanting to control others, but more about preserving the freedoms that we enjoyed.
We now seem to be living in a world where causing offense to a stranger on Twitter carries the risk of losing one’s job or reputation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbsHox73mRo
That comedy clip was really good man! To be honest, I intended to hate-watch it so I could argue with you (in that kind of mood), but I thought it was both funny and sensible. Thanks to you and that longhaired English comedian alike.
I admit there are generational tendencies, I just thought that Ellis leaned on them too hard. Also, suggesting that your own generation was/is the coolest ever is too easy–not a balanced long-view nor a traditional conservatism in the better sense.
If Brett is 58 years old, he’s technically a Gen X, but right on the cusp as the year of delineation was 1965.
Brilliant video, by the way, thanks for sharing.
That comedy clip was really good man! To be honest, I intended to hate-watch it so I could argue with you (in that kind of mood), but I thought it was both funny and sensible. Thanks to you and that longhaired English comedian alike.
I admit there are generational tendencies, I just thought that Ellis leaned on them too hard. Also, suggesting that your own generation was/is the coolest ever is too easy–not a balanced long-view nor a traditional conservatism in the better sense.
If Brett is 58 years old, he’s technically a Gen X, but right on the cusp as the year of delineation was 1965.
Brilliant video, by the way, thanks for sharing.
Last edited 1 year ago by Warren Trees
Julian Farrows
1 year ago
I think part of the reason why Gen X is the most conservative of the generations — much more than boomers, much more than millennials — is that we had the most freedom. We looked to be shocked. We wanted to be offended. We loved dirty jokes. We loved music.
As a Gen X-er this resonated with me. I don’t really like dividing generations into ‘groups’, but from my own teenage perspective of the 1990s, it really was a great time to be young. My becoming more conservative has nothing to do with wanting to control others, but more about preserving the freedoms that we enjoyed.
We now seem to be living in a world where causing offense to a stranger on Twitter carries the risk of losing one’s job or reputation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbsHox73mRo
R Wright
1 year ago
Rereading American Psycho I was amazed to discover through the preface that at the time of release (well before my time) the book had been attacked en masse by feminists accusing the author of glamourising violence against women. The author claimed when the book came out and depicted the vapid, pathetic life of Bateman the feminist outcry vanished as quickly as it came. It hadn’t occurred to these women that a book about soulless yuppies was not meant to be depicting them positively.
Now decades later one of the last bastions of free thought in the western ‘salon’ offers a home to both Mr Ellis and those same feminists that went after him. History is not without a sense of irony.
R Wright
1 year ago
Rereading American Psycho I was amazed to discover through the preface that at the time of release (well before my time) the book had been attacked en masse by feminists accusing the author of glamourising violence against women. The author claimed when the book came out and depicted the vapid, pathetic life of Bateman the feminist outcry vanished as quickly as it came. It hadn’t occurred to these women that a book about soulless yuppies was not meant to be depicting them positively.
Now decades later one of the last bastions of free thought in the western ‘salon’ offers a home to both Mr Ellis and those same feminists that went after him. History is not without a sense of irony.
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
There’s a hint of Truman Capote about Bret. I think he knows that.
There’s a hint of Truman Capote about Bret. I think he knows that.
AJ Mac
1 year ago
When it comes to generational labels: I’m a Gen Xer, several years younger than Ellis. But can we agree that we’ve gotten carried away with these groupings?
“Wanting to be liked was not part of Gen X”. Bullshit. That is ridiculous. Wanting to seem to cool and too detached to care about being liked was quite typical in the 1980s U.S. high school scene as I experienced it, but most wanted to be liked for that, for being “too cool for school”.
I enjoyed this interview with an intelligent and opinionated fellow-American with whom I disagree about a lot–but I didn’t like or take issue with it because he shares consistent or overarching political and cultural sensibilities with people that are around our respective ages.
AJ Mac
1 year ago
When it comes to generational labels: I’m a Gen Xer, several years younger than Ellis. But can we agree that we’ve gotten carried away with these groupings?
“Wanting to be liked was not part of Gen X”. Bullshit. That is ridiculous. Wanting to seem to cool and too detached to care about being liked was quite typical in the 1980s U.S. high school scene as I experienced it, but most wanted to be liked for that, for being “too cool for school”.
I enjoyed this interview with an intelligent and opinionated fellow-American with whom I disagree about a lot–but I didn’t like or take issue with it because he shares consistent or overarching political and cultural sensibilities with people that are around our respective ages.
Caroline Ayers
1 year ago
Found this interview surprisingly fascinating! Have never read a Brett Easton Ellis book but I’d definitely invite him to dinner (for his conversation).
Caroline Ayers
1 year ago
Found this interview surprisingly fascinating! Have never read a Brett Easton Ellis book but I’d definitely invite him to dinner (for his conversation).
J Bryant
1 year ago
The transcript of the interview is more interesting than the interview itself, imo. The video is twelve minutes of what seems to have been a longer interview and feels incomplete: no intro, no natural transition into the questions. I hope Unherd posts the full version.
J Bryant
1 year ago
The transcript of the interview is more interesting than the interview itself, imo. The video is twelve minutes of what seems to have been a longer interview and feels incomplete: no intro, no natural transition into the questions. I hope Unherd posts the full version.
polidori redux
1 year ago
“I don’t think Patrick Bateman is necessarily as insane as people perceive him… He wasn’t wrong about a lot of things that he noticed!”
You can be right about the things that you notice and still be insane – It is your response to these things that indicates sanity or a lack of it.
“I have a boyfriend who went through major addiction issues two years ago. I’m really worried that this is the first time I’ve left him alone for two weeks… I’ve had major plumbing issues in my apartment for f*cking ages.”
Bathos. Though perhaps New Yorkers see plumbing as an existential issue.
Exactly. Thank you calling out this absurd defense of a sex-haunted psycho-killer. Maybe the critical or general readers’ objections to the book were more to do with this underlying excess of sympathy or authorial identification with the murderer?
I’d welcome any reply or pushback from commenters who’ve read American Psycho: I’ve only seen a portion of the movie, a pretty unwholesome viewing experience that I stuck with for quite a while because of Christian Bale’s compelling-if-repulsive performance.
Exactly. Thank you calling out this absurd defense of a sex-haunted psycho-killer. Maybe the critical or general readers’ objections to the book were more to do with this underlying excess of sympathy or authorial identification with the murderer?
I’d welcome any reply or pushback from commenters who’ve read American Psycho: I’ve only seen a portion of the movie, a pretty unwholesome viewing experience that I stuck with for quite a while because of Christian Bale’s compelling-if-repulsive performance.
polidori redux
1 year ago
“I don’t think Patrick Bateman is necessarily as insane as people perceive him… He wasn’t wrong about a lot of things that he noticed!”
You can be right about the things that you notice and still be insane – It is your response to these things that indicates sanity or a lack of it.
“I have a boyfriend who went through major addiction issues two years ago. I’m really worried that this is the first time I’ve left him alone for two weeks… I’ve had major plumbing issues in my apartment for f*cking ages.”
Bathos. Though perhaps New Yorkers see plumbing as an existential issue.
Last edited 1 year ago by polidori redux
cara williams
1 year ago
i read american psycho again a couple of months ago. i had forgotten the book and only really remembered the film. but re reading the book almost took my head off. the descriptions of torturing women were so full on. wow. my mind struggled to even process them. and i kept thinking, this guy actually thought this stuff and wrote it down… it’s just horrific.
It sounds truly obscene. What is the defensible motive for such luxuriating, pornographic violence other than shock value and bad-boy sales-appeal? I wonder if Ellis being gay is meant to partly excuse the misogyny. The word gets overused, but seems to fit here.
Did you all expect anything but horrific/ obscene? Surely that’s the point of the genre. You can’t make horror films like American psycho without a horrific script or book to base it on. If it wasn’t popular, it wouldn’t have sold. There doesn’t need to be a ‘defensible motive’ for writing a book does there?
That’s fair enough. There doesn’t need to be one but I’d rather there were. If you’re helping to metastasize the mega-genre of murder-porn, maybe have some psychological insight beyond mere sympathy for the devil? Obscenity itself is the point? I thought/think it is pretending to something more sophisticated or transgressive in a special way. It wasn’t promoted or received as a mere genre novel in the horror category.
Did you like American Psycho? Is it good writing or storytelling and if so, why?
All kinds of crap has a perfect right to exist despite anyone’s huffy objections. But I can certainly criticize it if I find it to be crap. Right?
Yeah sure, criticise away, honestly I’ve not read it myself, my sister has, her review: f*cking dark. But the fact you’d like a ‘defensible motive’ sounded a bit creeping toward ‘authoritarian liberalism’ perhaps. Like people have to give a justification for what they write? Or that some forms of writing shouldnt be allowed?
That’s further than I intended, and I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal (Who would? It sounds very uncool). Now you want me to provide a “defensible motive” for suggesting there should be standards for things that receive major attention in the form of wide publication, a movie, interviews with the author, etc.?
OK. I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”. (Is it funny? though-provoking? insightful? satirical?). I’m not saying they should be burned or banned if they don’t, just not emphasized and discussed to death beyond their merits, when there has been no success or even attempt on the artist’s part to make something good or worthwhile or meaningful–or with redeeming upside.
I do think children and unstable people and even those of us who fancy ourselves smartypants should be better protected from pure garbage with no discernible upside–I’m kind of an authoritarian or self-appointed, powerless Cultural Guardian in that sense. I guess snuff porn can exist if no actual people are killed during its making. But why make or read or watch it? Why write an article about it?
Here’s where I admit as I have elsewhere on this board that I haven’t read it either; saw part of the movie–sickening, not for me. But I’m still somewhat willing to be persuaded of the book and movie’s non-negative value, as something more than snuff porn.
Even as a (partly-recovered) literary snob, I’m ok with people reading pulp trash, but I wish they wouldn’t read snuff porn or deranged manifestos that lack the psychological insight of Dostoevsky or Edgar Allan Poe or Mary Shelley or whomever. Maybe American Psycho is more than snuff porn, but since both of us have had the good sense to spare ourselves from reading it, we can’t make an informed assessment of the work we are vaguely, indirectly discussing.
I’m interested in the more general questions of our exchange, but I guess I’ve expended a lot of time and energy arguing (and complaining) that the trashiest, sickest books (subjective? yes) don’t deserve this much time, energy, or attention, in my opinion.
Well I have to say I thought your reply was brilliant and entertaining.
‘I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal’ – lol sorry, that was unintentional I tend to errr on the blunter side, not always on purpose either, I wish I could write like some on here. I was trying to question the idea of writing needing a defensible motive I suppose.
‘I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”’
So bear with me, while I try and get to the point.
I can see your point, but some stuff, especially some art and literature isn’t really ever created for a particular purpose. It’s made because that person has that particular idea and just makes/writes it? So like the author says about his book, he wrote for him, because he wanted to write it, so is that a good enough purpose I suppose? Perhaps not everything has to be good and meaningful? Human nature is not always good and meaningful, so maybe we would be trying to ignore the ‘effin dark’ side of our nature?
Like you say, neither of us has read it, so can’t get too hung up on it 🙂 it’s not my cup of tea to be honest!
A fair reply. Very true that it doesn’t work to ignore the shadow side or effin’ dark side of human nature, or within ourselves. I tend to not be a fan of work where that darkness is just splattered onto the page or canvas, but that doesn’t mean it won’t have value for some.
I’m interested in how one might defend a work like this against a charge of pointless obscenity, but free speech is critical and while I’m free to skip things I dislike or distrust, I don’t get to “cancel” them. Nor should anything be subject to a ban unless a high bar of harm–like straight-up incitement to violence–has been cleared. See you on another board, probably.
A fair reply. Very true that it doesn’t work to ignore the shadow side or effin’ dark side of human nature, or within ourselves. I tend to not be a fan of work where that darkness is just splattered onto the page or canvas, but that doesn’t mean it won’t have value for some.
I’m interested in how one might defend a work like this against a charge of pointless obscenity, but free speech is critical and while I’m free to skip things I dislike or distrust, I don’t get to “cancel” them. Nor should anything be subject to a ban unless a high bar of harm–like straight-up incitement to violence–has been cleared. See you on another board, probably.
Well I have to say I thought your reply was brilliant and entertaining.
‘I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal’ – lol sorry, that was unintentional I tend to errr on the blunter side, not always on purpose either, I wish I could write like some on here. I was trying to question the idea of writing needing a defensible motive I suppose.
‘I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”’
So bear with me, while I try and get to the point.
I can see your point, but some stuff, especially some art and literature isn’t really ever created for a particular purpose. It’s made because that person has that particular idea and just makes/writes it? So like the author says about his book, he wrote for him, because he wanted to write it, so is that a good enough purpose I suppose? Perhaps not everything has to be good and meaningful? Human nature is not always good and meaningful, so maybe we would be trying to ignore the ‘effin dark’ side of our nature?
Like you say, neither of us has read it, so can’t get too hung up on it 🙂 it’s not my cup of tea to be honest!
That’s further than I intended, and I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal (Who would? It sounds very uncool). Now you want me to provide a “defensible motive” for suggesting there should be standards for things that receive major attention in the form of wide publication, a movie, interviews with the author, etc.?
OK. I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”. (Is it funny? though-provoking? insightful? satirical?). I’m not saying they should be burned or banned if they don’t, just not emphasized and discussed to death beyond their merits, when there has been no success or even attempt on the artist’s part to make something good or worthwhile or meaningful–or with redeeming upside.
I do think children and unstable people and even those of us who fancy ourselves smartypants should be better protected from pure garbage with no discernible upside–I’m kind of an authoritarian or self-appointed, powerless Cultural Guardian in that sense. I guess snuff porn can exist if no actual people are killed during its making. But why make or read or watch it? Why write an article about it?
Here’s where I admit as I have elsewhere on this board that I haven’t read it either; saw part of the movie–sickening, not for me. But I’m still somewhat willing to be persuaded of the book and movie’s non-negative value, as something more than snuff porn.
Even as a (partly-recovered) literary snob, I’m ok with people reading pulp trash, but I wish they wouldn’t read snuff porn or deranged manifestos that lack the psychological insight of Dostoevsky or Edgar Allan Poe or Mary Shelley or whomever. Maybe American Psycho is more than snuff porn, but since both of us have had the good sense to spare ourselves from reading it, we can’t make an informed assessment of the work we are vaguely, indirectly discussing.
I’m interested in the more general questions of our exchange, but I guess I’ve expended a lot of time and energy arguing (and complaining) that the trashiest, sickest books (subjective? yes) don’t deserve this much time, energy, or attention, in my opinion.
Yeah sure, criticise away, honestly I’ve not read it myself, my sister has, her review: f*cking dark. But the fact you’d like a ‘defensible motive’ sounded a bit creeping toward ‘authoritarian liberalism’ perhaps. Like people have to give a justification for what they write? Or that some forms of writing shouldnt be allowed?
That’s fair enough. There doesn’t need to be one but I’d rather there were. If you’re helping to metastasize the mega-genre of murder-porn, maybe have some psychological insight beyond mere sympathy for the devil? Obscenity itself is the point? I thought/think it is pretending to something more sophisticated or transgressive in a special way. It wasn’t promoted or received as a mere genre novel in the horror category.
Did you like American Psycho? Is it good writing or storytelling and if so, why?
All kinds of crap has a perfect right to exist despite anyone’s huffy objections. But I can certainly criticize it if I find it to be crap. Right?
Did you all expect anything but horrific/ obscene? Surely that’s the point of the genre. You can’t make horror films like American psycho without a horrific script or book to base it on. If it wasn’t popular, it wouldn’t have sold. There doesn’t need to be a ‘defensible motive’ for writing a book does there?
It sounds truly obscene. What is the defensible motive for such luxuriating, pornographic violence other than shock value and bad-boy sales-appeal? I wonder if Ellis being gay is meant to partly excuse the misogyny. The word gets overused, but seems to fit here.
cara williams
1 year ago
i read american psycho again a couple of months ago. i had forgotten the book and only really remembered the film. but re reading the book almost took my head off. the descriptions of torturing women were so full on. wow. my mind struggled to even process them. and i kept thinking, this guy actually thought this stuff and wrote it down… it’s just horrific.
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
This is the second time in a week or so that I’ve had this guy staring at me when I opened up Unherd. Same pretentious stare. What is the fascination at Unherd with him? He’s not exactly “unherd”. Do they have his stock in their portfolio? Is there a conflict of interest we should know something about? I read the first article. And though I read a great deal of fiction I saw nothing even remotely of interest. He seems like a flaming narcissist to me. Get some different material if you want me to keep subscribing.
Jeff Cunningham
1 year ago
This is the second time in a week or so that I’ve had this guy staring at me when I opened up Unherd. Same pretentious stare. What is the fascination at Unherd with him? He’s not exactly “unherd”. Do they have his stock in their portfolio? Is there a conflict of interest we should know something about? I read the first article. And though I read a great deal of fiction I saw nothing even remotely of interest. He seems like a flaming narcissist to me. Get some different material if you want me to keep subscribing.
No thank you. Five minutes was enough time to give this man. The laughter from the audience sounded ingratiating to me.
Saul D
1 year ago
A suggestion. At the weekend I have time to dig into some stuff. To read something a bit more profound than mid-week, with a bit of meat and bone to chew on. Something that generates some good free-thinking in the comments that makes it worth coming back over a couple of dead days while the main writers are taking their leisure. Most importantly that makes us think, question and investigate something a little off-beat while we have the time to spare. Too many weekends are just a bit dull compared to the rest of the week.
Seconded. All Weekend Longreads or something in a more-searching mode like Food for Chat or Submitted for Your Perusal. Those pun-happy categories are general hints for things that are engaging and challenging–perhaps even fun at times, but not trivial. The better articles on this site–and even some of the lesser ones–tend to generate thoughtful, lively responses and exchanges.
..and what everyone seems to not realise about Kanye is that bipolar really does make you say crazy things. I know because my beloved son has the condition. He is well now because he has the right meds. But I remember him telling us when he was in a less controlled state, that we must build an underground Bat Cave (as in Batman) and get my sister in law to design it (as she’s great at interior design). This was dropped into normal conversation. So really with Kanye, I suspect he’s just off his meds, and it’s not fair to draw conclusions about his views based on what he says in those circumstances. I may be wrong though, as obviously I don’t know that.
..and what everyone seems to not realise about Kanye is that bipolar really does make you say crazy things. I know because my beloved son has the condition. He is well now because he has the right meds. But I remember him telling us when he was in a less controlled state, that we must build an underground Bat Cave (as in Batman) and get my sister in law to design it (as she’s great at interior design). This was dropped into normal conversation. So really with Kanye, I suspect he’s just off his meds, and it’s not fair to draw conclusions about his views based on what he says in those circumstances. I may be wrong though, as obviously I don’t know that.
‘‘All three of them said they had never read a novel. I said, I don’t know what you mean. You’re all college graduates. How is that possible? Oh, yeah, they told me, we were assigned novels. We just did our essays from articles on the internet. We have never read a novel.”
Yea, well just look at what has been written since this writer and his ilk took over. I would not read any of this drek either – no wonder even he mentions the Classics with reverence. 1980s was pretty much the last gasp of literature and art; 1990s the death rattle, 2000s, the coroner was wheeling the industry of book writing off to be buried – no one felt an autopsy was needed as smoking guns and bloody knives and garrote ropes and bottles of poison were covering the floor.
And the label on the poison bottles read:
Post Modernism, situational ethics, relative morals, elastic code of honour, and confused genders……
Rock and pop music and movies have also been dead in the water these last couple of decades as well
yes, well, as has society as a whole. Once the Bible was totally replaced with youtube, facebook, instagram, and finally tick-toc and only-fans; as the source of understanding of ultimate ,the world was taken by ‘The Lord of the Flies’ (which is an old name for Beelzebub)
Or maybe it was the explosion at the start of the 1980s of American consumer culture, you know era of mass produced crap, big brands, killing originality. Media increasingly wanting stuff they can brand and package etc. Big brands squeezing out smaller competitors. Music industry has become similar. Not to do with the bible so much, if anything surely the Internet made it easier to ‘spread the word’?
I grew up in the 70s and 80s and don’t recall those times as a cultural wonderland, even in contrast to now. Nor was the Bible, in my recollection, held in general reverence, either in letter or spirit (not that it has in fact been “replaced” with social media).
Are you referring to specific cultural conditions or artistic output in the 80s and before, in literature and music, or just in WF Buckley’s memorable quip: “standing athwart history, yelling ‘stop!'”?. I thought much 80s music was heartless and lame, though some of it holds up and now it’s old enough to be called classic, at least for marketing purposes.
Some of us think that even nostalgia’s not as good as it used to be. Can you name some of the great art and literature that constituted this purported last gasp?
Or maybe it was the explosion at the start of the 1980s of American consumer culture, you know era of mass produced crap, big brands, killing originality. Media increasingly wanting stuff they can brand and package etc. Big brands squeezing out smaller competitors. Music industry has become similar. Not to do with the bible so much, if anything surely the Internet made it easier to ‘spread the word’?
I grew up in the 70s and 80s and don’t recall those times as a cultural wonderland, even in contrast to now. Nor was the Bible, in my recollection, held in general reverence, either in letter or spirit (not that it has in fact been “replaced” with social media).
Are you referring to specific cultural conditions or artistic output in the 80s and before, in literature and music, or just in WF Buckley’s memorable quip: “standing athwart history, yelling ‘stop!'”?. I thought much 80s music was heartless and lame, though some of it holds up and now it’s old enough to be called classic, at least for marketing purposes.
Some of us think that even nostalgia’s not as good as it used to be. Can you name some of the great art and literature that constituted this purported last gasp?
yes, well, as has society as a whole. Once the Bible was totally replaced with youtube, facebook, instagram, and finally tick-toc and only-fans; as the source of understanding of ultimate ,the world was taken by ‘The Lord of the Flies’ (which is an old name for Beelzebub)
Rock and pop music and movies have also been dead in the water these last couple of decades as well
‘‘All three of them said they had never read a novel. I said, I don’t know what you mean. You’re all college graduates. How is that possible? Oh, yeah, they told me, we were assigned novels. We just did our essays from articles on the internet. We have never read a novel.”
Yea, well just look at what has been written since this writer and his ilk took over. I would not read any of this drek either – no wonder even he mentions the Classics with reverence. 1980s was pretty much the last gasp of literature and art; 1990s the death rattle, 2000s, the coroner was wheeling the industry of book writing off to be buried – no one felt an autopsy was needed as smoking guns and bloody knives and garrote ropes and bottles of poison were covering the floor.
And the label on the poison bottles read:
Post Modernism, situational ethics, relative morals, elastic code of honour, and confused genders……
As a Gen X-er this resonated with me. I don’t really like dividing generations into ‘groups’, but from my own teenage perspective of the 1990s, it really was a great time to be young. My becoming more conservative has nothing to do with wanting to control others, but more about preserving the freedoms that we enjoyed.
We now seem to be living in a world where causing offense to a stranger on Twitter carries the risk of losing one’s job or reputation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbsHox73mRo
That comedy clip was really good man! To be honest, I intended to hate-watch it so I could argue with you (in that kind of mood), but I thought it was both funny and sensible. Thanks to you and that longhaired English comedian alike.
I admit there are generational tendencies, I just thought that Ellis leaned on them too hard. Also, suggesting that your own generation was/is the coolest ever is too easy–not a balanced long-view nor a traditional conservatism in the better sense.
If Brett is 58 years old, he’s technically a Gen X, but right on the cusp as the year of delineation was 1965.
Brilliant video, by the way, thanks for sharing.
That comedy clip was really good man! To be honest, I intended to hate-watch it so I could argue with you (in that kind of mood), but I thought it was both funny and sensible. Thanks to you and that longhaired English comedian alike.
I admit there are generational tendencies, I just thought that Ellis leaned on them too hard. Also, suggesting that your own generation was/is the coolest ever is too easy–not a balanced long-view nor a traditional conservatism in the better sense.
If Brett is 58 years old, he’s technically a Gen X, but right on the cusp as the year of delineation was 1965.
Brilliant video, by the way, thanks for sharing.
As a Gen X-er this resonated with me. I don’t really like dividing generations into ‘groups’, but from my own teenage perspective of the 1990s, it really was a great time to be young. My becoming more conservative has nothing to do with wanting to control others, but more about preserving the freedoms that we enjoyed.
We now seem to be living in a world where causing offense to a stranger on Twitter carries the risk of losing one’s job or reputation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbsHox73mRo
Rereading American Psycho I was amazed to discover through the preface that at the time of release (well before my time) the book had been attacked en masse by feminists accusing the author of glamourising violence against women. The author claimed when the book came out and depicted the vapid, pathetic life of Bateman the feminist outcry vanished as quickly as it came. It hadn’t occurred to these women that a book about soulless yuppies was not meant to be depicting them positively.
Now decades later one of the last bastions of free thought in the western ‘salon’ offers a home to both Mr Ellis and those same feminists that went after him. History is not without a sense of irony.
Rereading American Psycho I was amazed to discover through the preface that at the time of release (well before my time) the book had been attacked en masse by feminists accusing the author of glamourising violence against women. The author claimed when the book came out and depicted the vapid, pathetic life of Bateman the feminist outcry vanished as quickly as it came. It hadn’t occurred to these women that a book about soulless yuppies was not meant to be depicting them positively.
Now decades later one of the last bastions of free thought in the western ‘salon’ offers a home to both Mr Ellis and those same feminists that went after him. History is not without a sense of irony.
There’s a hint of Truman Capote about Bret. I think he knows that.
I’d guess he cultivates it.
I’d guess he cultivates it.
There’s a hint of Truman Capote about Bret. I think he knows that.
When it comes to generational labels: I’m a Gen Xer, several years younger than Ellis. But can we agree that we’ve gotten carried away with these groupings?
“Wanting to be liked was not part of Gen X”. Bullshit. That is ridiculous. Wanting to seem to cool and too detached to care about being liked was quite typical in the 1980s U.S. high school scene as I experienced it, but most wanted to be liked for that, for being “too cool for school”.
I enjoyed this interview with an intelligent and opinionated fellow-American with whom I disagree about a lot–but I didn’t like or take issue with it because he shares consistent or overarching political and cultural sensibilities with people that are around our respective ages.
When it comes to generational labels: I’m a Gen Xer, several years younger than Ellis. But can we agree that we’ve gotten carried away with these groupings?
“Wanting to be liked was not part of Gen X”. Bullshit. That is ridiculous. Wanting to seem to cool and too detached to care about being liked was quite typical in the 1980s U.S. high school scene as I experienced it, but most wanted to be liked for that, for being “too cool for school”.
I enjoyed this interview with an intelligent and opinionated fellow-American with whom I disagree about a lot–but I didn’t like or take issue with it because he shares consistent or overarching political and cultural sensibilities with people that are around our respective ages.
Found this interview surprisingly fascinating! Have never read a Brett Easton Ellis book but I’d definitely invite him to dinner (for his conversation).
Found this interview surprisingly fascinating! Have never read a Brett Easton Ellis book but I’d definitely invite him to dinner (for his conversation).
The transcript of the interview is more interesting than the interview itself, imo. The video is twelve minutes of what seems to have been a longer interview and feels incomplete: no intro, no natural transition into the questions. I hope Unherd posts the full version.
The transcript of the interview is more interesting than the interview itself, imo. The video is twelve minutes of what seems to have been a longer interview and feels incomplete: no intro, no natural transition into the questions. I hope Unherd posts the full version.
“I don’t think Patrick Bateman is necessarily as insane as people perceive him… He wasn’t wrong about a lot of things that he noticed!”
You can be right about the things that you notice and still be insane – It is your response to these things that indicates sanity or a lack of it.
“I have a boyfriend who went through major addiction issues two years ago. I’m really worried that this is the first time I’ve left him alone for two weeks… I’ve had major plumbing issues in my apartment for f*cking ages.”
Bathos. Though perhaps New Yorkers see plumbing as an existential issue.
Scraping the bottom of the barrel rather than plumbing the depths, i’d say.
Exactly. Thank you calling out this absurd defense of a sex-haunted psycho-killer. Maybe the critical or general readers’ objections to the book were more to do with this underlying excess of sympathy or authorial identification with the murderer?
I’d welcome any reply or pushback from commenters who’ve read American Psycho: I’ve only seen a portion of the movie, a pretty unwholesome viewing experience that I stuck with for quite a while because of Christian Bale’s compelling-if-repulsive performance.
Scraping the bottom of the barrel rather than plumbing the depths, i’d say.
Exactly. Thank you calling out this absurd defense of a sex-haunted psycho-killer. Maybe the critical or general readers’ objections to the book were more to do with this underlying excess of sympathy or authorial identification with the murderer?
I’d welcome any reply or pushback from commenters who’ve read American Psycho: I’ve only seen a portion of the movie, a pretty unwholesome viewing experience that I stuck with for quite a while because of Christian Bale’s compelling-if-repulsive performance.
“I don’t think Patrick Bateman is necessarily as insane as people perceive him… He wasn’t wrong about a lot of things that he noticed!”
You can be right about the things that you notice and still be insane – It is your response to these things that indicates sanity or a lack of it.
“I have a boyfriend who went through major addiction issues two years ago. I’m really worried that this is the first time I’ve left him alone for two weeks… I’ve had major plumbing issues in my apartment for f*cking ages.”
Bathos. Though perhaps New Yorkers see plumbing as an existential issue.
i read american psycho again a couple of months ago. i had forgotten the book and only really remembered the film. but re reading the book almost took my head off. the descriptions of torturing women were so full on. wow. my mind struggled to even process them. and i kept thinking, this guy actually thought this stuff and wrote it down… it’s just horrific.
Ew, maybe I wouldn’t invite him to dinner then…..
maybe something you only need a spoon to eat
maybe something you only need a spoon to eat
It sounds truly obscene. What is the defensible motive for such luxuriating, pornographic violence other than shock value and bad-boy sales-appeal? I wonder if Ellis being gay is meant to partly excuse the misogyny. The word gets overused, but seems to fit here.
Did you all expect anything but horrific/ obscene? Surely that’s the point of the genre. You can’t make horror films like American psycho without a horrific script or book to base it on. If it wasn’t popular, it wouldn’t have sold. There doesn’t need to be a ‘defensible motive’ for writing a book does there?
That’s fair enough. There doesn’t need to be one but I’d rather there were. If you’re helping to metastasize the mega-genre of murder-porn, maybe have some psychological insight beyond mere sympathy for the devil? Obscenity itself is the point? I thought/think it is pretending to something more sophisticated or transgressive in a special way. It wasn’t promoted or received as a mere genre novel in the horror category.
Did you like American Psycho? Is it good writing or storytelling and if so, why?
All kinds of crap has a perfect right to exist despite anyone’s huffy objections. But I can certainly criticize it if I find it to be crap. Right?
Yeah sure, criticise away, honestly I’ve not read it myself, my sister has, her review: f*cking dark. But the fact you’d like a ‘defensible motive’ sounded a bit creeping toward ‘authoritarian liberalism’ perhaps. Like people have to give a justification for what they write? Or that some forms of writing shouldnt be allowed?
That’s further than I intended, and I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal (Who would? It sounds very uncool). Now you want me to provide a “defensible motive” for suggesting there should be standards for things that receive major attention in the form of wide publication, a movie, interviews with the author, etc.?
OK. I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”. (Is it funny? though-provoking? insightful? satirical?). I’m not saying they should be burned or banned if they don’t, just not emphasized and discussed to death beyond their merits, when there has been no success or even attempt on the artist’s part to make something good or worthwhile or meaningful–or with redeeming upside.
I do think children and unstable people and even those of us who fancy ourselves smartypants should be better protected from pure garbage with no discernible upside–I’m kind of an authoritarian or self-appointed, powerless Cultural Guardian in that sense. I guess snuff porn can exist if no actual people are killed during its making. But why make or read or watch it? Why write an article about it?
Here’s where I admit as I have elsewhere on this board that I haven’t read it either; saw part of the movie–sickening, not for me. But I’m still somewhat willing to be persuaded of the book and movie’s non-negative value, as something more than snuff porn.
Even as a (partly-recovered) literary snob, I’m ok with people reading pulp trash, but I wish they wouldn’t read snuff porn or deranged manifestos that lack the psychological insight of Dostoevsky or Edgar Allan Poe or Mary Shelley or whomever. Maybe American Psycho is more than snuff porn, but since both of us have had the good sense to spare ourselves from reading it, we can’t make an informed assessment of the work we are vaguely, indirectly discussing.
I’m interested in the more general questions of our exchange, but I guess I’ve expended a lot of time and energy arguing (and complaining) that the trashiest, sickest books (subjective? yes) don’t deserve this much time, energy, or attention, in my opinion.
Well I have to say I thought your reply was brilliant and entertaining.
‘I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal’ – lol sorry, that was unintentional I tend to errr on the blunter side, not always on purpose either, I wish I could write like some on here. I was trying to question the idea of writing needing a defensible motive I suppose.
‘I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”’
So bear with me, while I try and get to the point.
I can see your point, but some stuff, especially some art and literature isn’t really ever created for a particular purpose. It’s made because that person has that particular idea and just makes/writes it? So like the author says about his book, he wrote for him, because he wanted to write it, so is that a good enough purpose I suppose? Perhaps not everything has to be good and meaningful? Human nature is not always good and meaningful, so maybe we would be trying to ignore the ‘effin dark’ side of our nature?
Like you say, neither of us has read it, so can’t get too hung up on it 🙂 it’s not my cup of tea to be honest!
A fair reply. Very true that it doesn’t work to ignore the shadow side or effin’ dark side of human nature, or within ourselves. I tend to not be a fan of work where that darkness is just splattered onto the page or canvas, but that doesn’t mean it won’t have value for some.
I’m interested in how one might defend a work like this against a charge of pointless obscenity, but free speech is critical and while I’m free to skip things I dislike or distrust, I don’t get to “cancel” them. Nor should anything be subject to a ban unless a high bar of harm–like straight-up incitement to violence–has been cleared. See you on another board, probably.
A fair reply. Very true that it doesn’t work to ignore the shadow side or effin’ dark side of human nature, or within ourselves. I tend to not be a fan of work where that darkness is just splattered onto the page or canvas, but that doesn’t mean it won’t have value for some.
I’m interested in how one might defend a work like this against a charge of pointless obscenity, but free speech is critical and while I’m free to skip things I dislike or distrust, I don’t get to “cancel” them. Nor should anything be subject to a ban unless a high bar of harm–like straight-up incitement to violence–has been cleared. See you on another board, probably.
Well I have to say I thought your reply was brilliant and entertaining.
‘I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal’ – lol sorry, that was unintentional I tend to errr on the blunter side, not always on purpose either, I wish I could write like some on here. I was trying to question the idea of writing needing a defensible motive I suppose.
‘I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”’
So bear with me, while I try and get to the point.
I can see your point, but some stuff, especially some art and literature isn’t really ever created for a particular purpose. It’s made because that person has that particular idea and just makes/writes it? So like the author says about his book, he wrote for him, because he wanted to write it, so is that a good enough purpose I suppose? Perhaps not everything has to be good and meaningful? Human nature is not always good and meaningful, so maybe we would be trying to ignore the ‘effin dark’ side of our nature?
Like you say, neither of us has read it, so can’t get too hung up on it 🙂 it’s not my cup of tea to be honest!
That’s further than I intended, and I certainly don’t embrace the label of authoritarian liberal (Who would? It sounds very uncool). Now you want me to provide a “defensible motive” for suggesting there should be standards for things that receive major attention in the form of wide publication, a movie, interviews with the author, etc.?
OK. I’m saying that things put before a general audience should have either a point, a purpose, or an aesthetic value that is isn’t only “effin’ dark”. (Is it funny? though-provoking? insightful? satirical?). I’m not saying they should be burned or banned if they don’t, just not emphasized and discussed to death beyond their merits, when there has been no success or even attempt on the artist’s part to make something good or worthwhile or meaningful–or with redeeming upside.
I do think children and unstable people and even those of us who fancy ourselves smartypants should be better protected from pure garbage with no discernible upside–I’m kind of an authoritarian or self-appointed, powerless Cultural Guardian in that sense. I guess snuff porn can exist if no actual people are killed during its making. But why make or read or watch it? Why write an article about it?
Here’s where I admit as I have elsewhere on this board that I haven’t read it either; saw part of the movie–sickening, not for me. But I’m still somewhat willing to be persuaded of the book and movie’s non-negative value, as something more than snuff porn.
Even as a (partly-recovered) literary snob, I’m ok with people reading pulp trash, but I wish they wouldn’t read snuff porn or deranged manifestos that lack the psychological insight of Dostoevsky or Edgar Allan Poe or Mary Shelley or whomever. Maybe American Psycho is more than snuff porn, but since both of us have had the good sense to spare ourselves from reading it, we can’t make an informed assessment of the work we are vaguely, indirectly discussing.
I’m interested in the more general questions of our exchange, but I guess I’ve expended a lot of time and energy arguing (and complaining) that the trashiest, sickest books (subjective? yes) don’t deserve this much time, energy, or attention, in my opinion.
Yeah sure, criticise away, honestly I’ve not read it myself, my sister has, her review: f*cking dark. But the fact you’d like a ‘defensible motive’ sounded a bit creeping toward ‘authoritarian liberalism’ perhaps. Like people have to give a justification for what they write? Or that some forms of writing shouldnt be allowed?
That’s fair enough. There doesn’t need to be one but I’d rather there were. If you’re helping to metastasize the mega-genre of murder-porn, maybe have some psychological insight beyond mere sympathy for the devil? Obscenity itself is the point? I thought/think it is pretending to something more sophisticated or transgressive in a special way. It wasn’t promoted or received as a mere genre novel in the horror category.
Did you like American Psycho? Is it good writing or storytelling and if so, why?
All kinds of crap has a perfect right to exist despite anyone’s huffy objections. But I can certainly criticize it if I find it to be crap. Right?
I guess you haven’t delved into the snuff film genre, then?
Did you all expect anything but horrific/ obscene? Surely that’s the point of the genre. You can’t make horror films like American psycho without a horrific script or book to base it on. If it wasn’t popular, it wouldn’t have sold. There doesn’t need to be a ‘defensible motive’ for writing a book does there?
I guess you haven’t delved into the snuff film genre, then?
Ew, maybe I wouldn’t invite him to dinner then…..
It sounds truly obscene. What is the defensible motive for such luxuriating, pornographic violence other than shock value and bad-boy sales-appeal? I wonder if Ellis being gay is meant to partly excuse the misogyny. The word gets overused, but seems to fit here.
i read american psycho again a couple of months ago. i had forgotten the book and only really remembered the film. but re reading the book almost took my head off. the descriptions of torturing women were so full on. wow. my mind struggled to even process them. and i kept thinking, this guy actually thought this stuff and wrote it down… it’s just horrific.
This is the second time in a week or so that I’ve had this guy staring at me when I opened up Unherd. Same pretentious stare. What is the fascination at Unherd with him? He’s not exactly “unherd”. Do they have his stock in their portfolio? Is there a conflict of interest we should know something about? I read the first article. And though I read a great deal of fiction I saw nothing even remotely of interest. He seems like a flaming narcissist to me. Get some different material if you want me to keep subscribing.
This is the second time in a week or so that I’ve had this guy staring at me when I opened up Unherd. Same pretentious stare. What is the fascination at Unherd with him? He’s not exactly “unherd”. Do they have his stock in their portfolio? Is there a conflict of interest we should know something about? I read the first article. And though I read a great deal of fiction I saw nothing even remotely of interest. He seems like a flaming narcissist to me. Get some different material if you want me to keep subscribing.
DNF
Hahaha! Good one!
Hahaha! Good one!
DNF
No thank you. Five minutes was enough time to give this man. The laughter from the audience sounded ingratiating to me.
A suggestion. At the weekend I have time to dig into some stuff. To read something a bit more profound than mid-week, with a bit of meat and bone to chew on. Something that generates some good free-thinking in the comments that makes it worth coming back over a couple of dead days while the main writers are taking their leisure. Most importantly that makes us think, question and investigate something a little off-beat while we have the time to spare. Too many weekends are just a bit dull compared to the rest of the week.
Seconded. All Weekend Longreads or something in a more-searching mode like Food for Chat or Submitted for Your Perusal. Those pun-happy categories are general hints for things that are engaging and challenging–perhaps even fun at times, but not trivial. The better articles on this site–and even some of the lesser ones–tend to generate thoughtful, lively responses and exchanges.
Another tedious uphill gardener…