Conversational Reading rightly calls out critic John Freeman over his latest foolishness vis-a-vis the state of experimental fiction, specifically, "the stunning lack of experimentation in American fiction during the past two decades."
Someone should send Freeman copies of Sorrentino´s library.
It's less of an indication of the state of experimental fiction and more a reflection on how poorly read a critic Freeman appears to be. Scott goes on to offer a brief list of notable experimental titles, and to chide Freeman for equating the use of neologisms with experimentation. And Scott's list merely scratches the surface, as visitors to his comments box observe. Much of what is published by McSweeney's is among the most interesting experimental work out there today. One imagines if Freeman were familiar with works like Salvador Plascencia's highly regarded The People of Paper, he wouldn't make such silly, sweeping generalizations.
Comments