by hn-0001 on 4/28/22, 3:04 PM with 131 comments
by scyclow on 4/28/22, 3:50 PM
by labrador on 4/28/22, 5:35 PM
After 8 paragraphs of this sort of thing we get to the book
The Tim Tebow CFL Chronicles follows the adventures of a fictionalized version of Tim Tebow who, brokenhearted over his inability to make it as an NFL quarterback, arrives in Toronto to join the Argonauts
What school of writing is teaching writers to bury the lede in a page or two of personal anecdotes?
by dfxm12 on 4/28/22, 3:51 PM
by Dotnaught on 4/28/22, 6:34 PM
Best out of how many novels that you've read over what period of time? And based on what criteria?
Isn't the proper headline here something more like, "I enjoyed this book"?
by brimble on 4/28/22, 3:45 PM
Also, the novel is actually a novella.
Also, it seems not to be a book, but a web page:
https://www.sbnation.com/2014/8/18/5998715/the-tim-tebow-cfl...
[EDIT] Also, from the story:
> Raghib Ismail. Call me Raghib.
sensible-chuckle.gif
[ANOTHER EDIT]
Further into the story now—in case it helps anyone decide whether or not to read it, this isn't slightly-twisted reality or magical realism or light urban fantasy or any of that, really, but full-on dream-logic.
by w0mbat on 4/28/22, 4:07 PM
by Aaargh20318 on 4/28/22, 8:43 PM
by soneca on 4/28/22, 4:05 PM
by f154hfds on 4/28/22, 4:10 PM
by zokier on 4/28/22, 4:42 PM
> For a longer time before the gritty period, we all dedicated ourselves to the idea that anything we’d acknowledge as very good had to be both serious and artsy. People really liked Good Will Hunting (see: very serious); it was also a good movie, so it won an Oscar. Zillions of people love movies like The Princess Bride and Happy Gilmore; it’s incredibly likely both dwarf Good Will Hunting in terms of total views, but you can’t even imagine a world where either could have possibly won an Oscar.
[...]
> This is a short article by my standards, but it does have me thinking: What kind of world could we actually live in, if we were willing to treat works of art made with the goal of making us happy as if they were important? What if we were willing to make them? We’ve seen what happens in a world where all the Oscars go to movies that make you cry, or that we pretend make us think even though they generally don't
There are plenty of widely acclaimed movies that can not be considered "very serious", picking some recent Oscar winners as examples with categorizations from wikipedia:
* Parasite ("black comedy thriller")
* Green Book ("comedy-drama")
* The Shape of Water ("romantic fantasy")
* Birdman ("black comedy drama")
* CODA ("comedy-drama")
* La La Land ("comedy-drama")
* Life Of Pie ("adventure-drama")
Are all those completely feel-good movies intended to make you happy? Maybe not, but still its not like happy/humorous/feel-good is completely disregarded category even among grumpy art critics.
by digb on 4/28/22, 4:05 PM
by neil_b on 4/28/22, 3:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIgK56cAjfY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx_ORMhpmoU&list=PLUXSZMIiUf...
by wldcordeiro on 4/28/22, 4:05 PM
by hprotagonist on 4/28/22, 3:39 PM
by kvathupo on 4/28/22, 8:47 PM
The author may enjoy books within the New Sincerity realm [1]. They often have magical realist elements [2]. In particular, _Infinite Jest_ seems like a clear recommendation; or for less surrealism, Franzen's _The Corrections_.
I wholeheartedly agree that art allows us to empathize with the lived experience of those who are ostensibly different.
by brightball on 4/28/22, 3:48 PM
by perardi on 4/28/22, 6:07 PM
Although some Canadian facts are so weird that they are nearly impossible to believe until you research them. Like the extremely well-appointed throne room at the top of the CN Tower that is kept in reserve for the British monarchy in case the UK is occupied during a war, and the royal family needs a secure and luxurious backup.
by thazework on 4/28/22, 5:31 PM
by ughitsaaron on 4/28/22, 4:26 PM
by kerblang on 4/28/22, 8:50 PM
by kwhitefoot on 4/28/22, 4:04 PM
by auto on 4/28/22, 6:03 PM
by sudden_dystopia on 4/28/22, 6:28 PM
by agentdrtran on 4/28/22, 7:30 PM
by huhtenberg on 4/28/22, 4:30 PM
Hilarious. Probably took the author ages to arrive at this particular formula.
by seshagiric on 4/28/22, 5:44 PM
by universa1 on 4/28/22, 5:46 PM
by platz on 4/28/22, 7:30 PM
by haunter on 4/28/22, 6:23 PM
by DantesKite on 4/28/22, 4:46 PM
by jacobjr23 on 4/28/22, 4:09 PM
by rambojohnson on 4/28/22, 4:01 PM
by udev on 4/28/22, 8:15 PM
by balls187 on 4/28/22, 8:59 PM
by clevergadget on 4/28/22, 6:42 PM
by yodon on 4/28/22, 4:00 PM
He started out as a darling of the religious right, because he played a major role in causes the religious right considered "theirs." When he began to write with equal clarity about how other aspects of the religious right's focus are at odds with those same deeply held principles that led him to do the work the right loved, they turned on him like this.
Complex moral issues are exactly that, complex. We need more intelligent people thinking hard about them, not more polarization into "you're either with us or against us" mindsets.
I'll be clear here that I'm not interested in judgements on literature provided by someone who frames their worldview as hating one of the few writers willing to address the real complexities of real issues today.
by lkxijlewlf on 4/28/22, 5:17 PM
Just stop. We all have different preferences.
Personally I hate American football (it's too much like a stupid video game now), so you'll never even get me to read whatever book this person is talking about.
by ChrisArchitect on 4/28/22, 5:13 PM