granice spekulativne / mainstream, filozofske književnosti

[gregorbikupil]

Evo sad toga što več neko vreme smeravam da vas pitam.
Samo za hobi pretražujem granična područja izmedju spekulativne fikcije (tu bi bilo recimo SF, fantasy, horror) i mainstream, filozofskom literaturom te klasičnom literaturom.

Zanimaju me knjige, koje bi teško bilo smjestiti na jednu ili drugi stranu, jer spadaju na obje.

Glavni motiv, da sam se ozbiljnije bacio u to, je Doris Lessing, dobitnica nobelove nagrade za književnost, koja se  poslednjih godina posvečivala pre svega naučnoj fantastici http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/index.html.

Evo nekih primjera knjiga, koje poreg cikla Canopus in Argos pomenute Doris Lessing smatram za nekako "granične" u smislu, da granice žanra proširavaju u mainstream, u filozofiju ili samo time, da su žanrska dela poznatog mainstream autora:
BURGESS -CLOCKWORK ORANGE
KEYES -FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON
SHUTE -ON THE BEACH
VONNEGUT -SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE
ORWELL -ANIMAL FARM
PYNCHON -GRAVITY'S RAINBOW
BURROUGHS -NAKED LUNCH
ČAPEK -KRAKATIT
ABBOT -FLATLAND
SWIFT -GULLIVER'S TRAVELS
CARROLL - ALICE'S ADVENTURES IN WONDERLAND
RYMAN -WAS
ATWOOD -THE HANDMAID'S TALE
TWAIN/CLEMENS -CONNETICUT YANKEE IN KING ARTHUR'S COURT
PELEVIN -ČAPAEV IN PRAZNOTA
KAFKA -PROCES
BORGES -FICCIONES
RABELAIS - GARGANTUA I PANTAGRUEL
BULGAKOV -MOJSTER IN MARGARETA
KIPLING -FANTASTICAL TALES
RAND -ATLAS SHRUGGED
LONDON -IRON HEEL
WILDE -PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY
SHAW -BACK TO METUSELAH
CHESTERTON -THE MAN WHO WAS THURSDAY
HESSE -MAGISTER LUDI
MCCARTHY - THE ROAD
JAMES - TURN OF THE SCREW.

Eto. svega po malome, sve nekako na granici.

Ne zanimaju me toliko natprirodne prikaze i njIhove manifestacije u literaturi (npr. Shakespearov Hamlet), niti djela, koja se oslanjaju na mitologiju (1001 noč, Homerove Iliada in Odiseja) ili na kakvegod religiozne doktrine, a ne zanimaju me ni baš evo one pripovjetke o zmajevima (brača Grimm). Rekao bih slobodno, da me zanima previše ni magični realizam.

Eto - molim vas, javljajte mi knjige koje bi kakogod mogle da se svrste u gornji miks - nije bitan nikakav način ili razlog, zbog kojeg mislite, da spadaju "na granicu".

Šta ču s time - neznam, nemam pojma.    Ali oču da čitam, to sigurno, tu, baš na granici, sakriveni su biseri...

[Mica Milovanovic]

Pa, da ne bih ja prepričavao šta drugi kažu, evo ti odrednice iz wikipedije vezane za ono što proučavaš:

Slipstream is a kind of fantastic or non-realistic fiction that crosses conventional genre boundaries between science fiction/fantasy or mainstream literary fiction.

The term slipstream was coined by cyberpunk author Bruce Sterling in an article originally published in SF Eye #5, July 1989. He wrote: "...this is a kind of writing which simply makes you feel very strange; the way that living in the twentieth century makes you feel, if you are a person of a certain sensibility." Slipstream fiction has consequently been referred to as "the fiction of strangeness," which is as clear a definition as any others in wide use. Science fiction authors James Patrick Kelly and John Kessel, editors of Feeling Very Strange: The Slipstream Anthology, argue that cognitive dissonance is at the heart of slipstream, and that it is not so much a genre as a literary effect, like horror or comedy. [1]

Slipstream falls between speculative fiction and mainstream fiction. While some slipstream novels employ elements of science fiction or fantasy, not all do. The common unifying factor of these pieces of literature is some degree of the surreal, the not-entirely-real, or the markedly anti-real.

In 2007, the first London Literature Festival at the Royal Festival Hall held a Slipstream night chaired by Toby Litt and featuring the British authors Steven Hall and Scarlett Thomas [2].

It is debateble whether "Slipstream" has been subsumed into the New Weird movement, among like-minded authors, or a new label that has been applied to them after the fact.[citation needed] It has even been dismissed as a marketing ploy, albeit a very deliberate and self-conscious one. Many of the authors who are associated with the movement either disavow belonging to it, or simply don't care what categorical labels their readers craft to name their work. The introduction to the New Weird anthology edited by Jeff VanderMeer and Ann VanderMeer, published by Tachyon Publications in February 2008, claims a specific, but very similar definition for New Weird

.


A onda i orginalan tekst Brusa Sterling-a, sa njegovim spiskom literature:

Bruce Sterling
bruces@well.sf.ca.usCATSCAN 5  "Slipstream"

    In a recent remarkable interview in _New
Pathways_ #11, Carter Scholz alludes with pained
resignation to the ongoing brain-death of science
fiction. In the 60s and 70s, Scholz opines, SF had a
chance to become a worthy literature; now that chance
has passed. Why? Because other writers have now
learned to adapt SF's best techniques to their own
ends.
    "And," says Scholz, "They make us look sick.
When I think of the best `speculative fiction' of the
past few years, I sure don't think of any Hugo or
Nebula winners. I think of Margaret Atwood's _The
Handmaid's Tale_, and of Don DeLillo's _White Noise_,
and of Batchelor's _The Birth of the People's Republic
of Antarctica_, and of Gaddis' _JR_ and _Carpenter's
Gothic_, and of Coetzee's _Life and Times of Michael
K_ . . . I have no hope at all that genre science
fiction can ever again have any literary significance.
But that's okay, because now there are other people
doing our job."
    It's hard to stop quoting this interview. All
interviews should be this good. There's some great
campy guff about the agonizing pain it takes to write
short stories; and a lecture on the unspeakable horror
of writer's block; and some nifty fusillades of
forthright personal abuse; and a lot of other stuff
that is making _New Pathways_ one of the most
interesting zines of the Eighties. Scholz even reveals
his use of the Fibonacci Sequence in setting the
length and number of the chapters in his novel
_Palimpsests_, and wonders how come nobody caught on
to this groundbreaking technique of his.
    Maybe some of this peripheral stuff kinda dulls
the lucid gleam of his argument. But you don't have to
be a medieval Italian mathematician to smell the reek
of decay in modern SF. Scholz is right. The job isn't
being done here.
    "Science Fiction" today is a lot like the
contemporary Soviet Union; the sprawling possessor of
a dream that failed. Science fiction's official dogma,
which almost everybody ignores, is based on attitudes
toward science and technology which are bankrupt and
increasingly divorced from any kind of reality. "Hard-
SF," the genre's ideological core, is a joke today; in
terms of the social realities of high-tech post-
industrialism, it's about as relevant as hard-
Leninism.
    Many of the best new SF writers seem openly
ashamed of their backward Skiffy nationality. "Ask not
what you can do for science fiction--ask how you can
edge away from it and still get paid there."
    A blithely stateless cosmopolitanism is the
order of the day, even for an accredited Clarion grad
like Pat Murphy: "I'm not going to bother what camp
things fall into," she declares in a recent _Locus_
interview. "I'm going to write the book I want and see
what happens . . . If the markets run together, I
leave it to the critics." For Murphy, genre is a dead
issue, and she serenely wills the trash-mountain to
come to Mohammed.
    And one has to sympathize. At one time, in its
clumsy way, Science Fiction offered some kind of
coherent social vision. SF may have been gaudy and
naive, and possessed by half-baked fantasies of power
and wish-fulfillment, but at least SF spoke a
contemporary language. Science Fiction did the job of
describing, in some eldritch way, what was actually
*happening*, at least in the popular imagination.
Maybe it wasn't for everybody, but if you were a
bright, unfastidious sort, you could read SF and feel,
in some satisfying and deeply unconscious way, that
you'd been given a real grip on the chrome-plated
handles of the Atomic Age.
    But *now* look at it. Consider the repulsive
ghastliness of the SF category's Lovecraftian
inbreeding. People retched in the 60s when De Camp and
Carter skinned the corpse of Robert E. Howard for its
hide and tallow, but nowadays necrophilia is run on an
industrial basis. Shared-world anthologies. Braided
meganovels. Role-playing tie-ins. Sharecropping books
written by pip-squeaks under the blazoned name of
established authors. Sequels of sequels, trilogy
sequels of yet-earlier trilogies, themselves cut-and-
pasted from yet-earlier trilogies. What's the common
thread here? The belittlement of individual
creativity, and the triumph of anonymous product. It's
like some Barthesian nightmare of the Death of the
Author and his replacement by "text."
    Science Fiction--much like that other former
Vanguard of Progressive Mankind, the Communist Party--
has lost touch with its cultural reasons for being.
Instead, SF has become a self-perpetuating commercial
power-structure, which happens to be in possession of
a traditional national territory: a portion of
bookstore rackspace.
    Science fiction habitually ignores any challenge
from outside. It is protected by the Iron Curtain of
category marketing. It does not even have to improve
"on its own terms," because its own terms no longer
mean anything; they are rarely even seriously
discussed. It is enough merely to point at the
rackspace and say "SF."
    Some people think it's great to have a genre
which has no inner identity, merely a locale where
it's sold. In theory, this grants vast authorial
freedom, but the longterm practical effect has been
heavily debilitating. When "anything is possible in
SF" then "anything" seems good enough to pass muster.
Why innovate? Innovate in what direction? Nothing is
moving, the compass is dead. Everything is becalmed;
toss a chip overboard to test the current, and it sits
there till it sinks without a trace.
    It's time to clarify some terms in this essay,
terms which I owe to Carter Scholz. "Category" is a
marketing term, denoting rackspace. "Genre" is a
spectrum of work united by an inner identity, a
coherent esthetic, a set of conceptual guidelines, an
ideology if you will.
    "Category" is commercially useful, but can be
ultimately deadening. "Genre," however, is powerful.
    Having made this distinction, I want to describe
what seems to me to be a new, emergent "genre," which
has not yet become a "category."
    This genre is not "category" SF; it is not even
"genre" SF. Instead, it is a contemporary kind of
writing which has set its face against consensus
reality. It is a fantastic, surreal sometimes,
speculative on occasion, but not rigorously so. It
does not aim to provoke a "sense of wonder" or to
systematically extrapolate in the manner of classic
science fiction.
    Instead, this is a kind of writing which simply
makes you feel very strange; the way that living in
the late twentieth century makes you feel, if you are
a person of a certain sensibility. We could call this
kind of fiction Novels of Postmodern Sensibility, but
that looks pretty bad on a category rack, and requires
an acronym besides; so for the sake of convenience and
argument, we will call these books "slipstream."
    "Slipstream" is not all that catchy a term, and
if this young genre ever becomes an actual category I
doubt it will use that name, which I just coined along
with my friend Richard Dorsett. "Slipstream" is a
parody of "mainstream," and nobody calls mainstream
"mainstream" except for us skiffy trolls.
    Nor is it at all likely that slipstream will
actually become a full-fledged genre, much less a
commercially successful category. The odds against it
are stiff. Slipstream authors must work outside the
cozy infrastructure of genre magazines, specialized
genre criticism, and the authorial esprit-de-corps of
a common genre cause.
    And vast dim marketing forces militate against
the commercial success of slipstream. It is very
difficult for these books to reach or build their own
native audience, because they are needles in a vast
moldering haystack. There is no convenient way for
would-be slipstream readers to move naturally from one
such work to another of its ilk. These books vanish
like drops of ink in a bucket of drool.
    Occasional writers will triumph against all
these odds, but their success remains limited by the
present category structures. They may eke out a fringe
following, but they fall between two stools. Their
work is too weird for Joe and Jane Normal. And they
lose the SF readers, who avoid the mainstream racks
because the stuff there ain't half weird enough. (One
result of this is that many slipstream books are left-
handed works by authors safely established in other
genres.)
    And it may well be argued that slipstream has no
"real" genre identity at all. Slipstream might seem to
be an artificial construct, a mere grab-bag of
mainstream books that happen to hold some interest for
SF readers. I happen to believe that slipstream books
have at least as much genre identity as the variegated
stock that passes for "science fiction" these days,
but I admit the force of the argument. As an SF
critic, I may well be blindered by my parochial point-
of-view. But I'm far from alone in this situation.
Once the notion of slipstream is vaguely explained,
almost all SF readers can recite a quick list of books
that belong there by right.
    These are books which SF readers recommend to
friends: "This isn't SF, but it sure ain't mainstream
and I think you might like it, okay?" It's every man
his own marketer, when it comes to slipstream.
    In preparation for this essay, I began
collecting these private lists. My master-list soon
grew impressively large, and serves as the best
pragmatic evidence for the actual existence of
slipstream that I can offer at the moment.
    I myself don't pretend to be an expert in this
kind of writing. I can try to define the zeitgeist of
slipstream in greater detail, but my efforts must be
halting.
    It seems to me that the heart of slipstream is
an attitude of peculiar aggression against "reality."
These are fantasies of a kind, but not fantasies which
are "futuristic" or "beyond the fields we know." These
books tend to sarcastically tear at the structure of
"everyday life."
    Some such books, the most "mainstream" ones, are
non-realistic literary fictions which avoid or ignore
SF genre conventions. But hard-core slipstream has
unique darker elements. Quite commonly these works
don't make a lot of common sense, and what's more they
often somehow imply that *nothing we know makes* "a
lot of sense" and perhaps even that *nothing ever
could*.
    It's very common for slipstream books to screw
around with the representational conventions of
fiction, pulling annoying little stunts that suggest
that the picture is leaking from the frame and may get
all over the reader's feet. A few such techniques are
infinite regress, trompe-l'oeil effects, metalepsis,
sharp violations of viewpoint limits, bizarrely blase'
reactions to horrifically unnatural events . . . all
the way out to concrete poetry and the deliberate use
of gibberish. Think M. C. Escher, and you have a
graphic equivalent.
    Slipstream is also marked by a cavalier attitude
toward "material" which is the polar opposite of the
hard-SF writer's "respect for scientific fact."
Frequently, historical figures are used in slipstream
fiction in ways which outrageously violate the
historical record. History, journalism, official
statements, advertising copy . . . all of these are
grist for the slipstream mill, and are disrespectfully
treated not as "real-life facts" but as "stuff," raw
material for collage work. Slipstream tends, not to
"create" new worlds, but to *quote* them, chop them up
out of context, and turn them against themselves.
    Some slipstream books are quite conventional in
narrative structure, but nevertheless use their
fantastic elements in a way that suggests that they
are somehow *integral* to the author's worldview; not
neat-o ideas to kick around for fun's sake, but
something in the nature of an inherent dementia. These
are fantastic elements which are not clearcut
"departures from known reality" but ontologically
*part of the whole mess*; "`real' compared to what?"
This is an increasingly difficult question to answer
in the videocratic 80s-90s, and is perhaps the most
genuinely innovative aspect of slipstream (scary as
that might seem).
    A "slipstream critic," should such a person ever
come to exist, would probably disagree with these
statements of mine, or consider them peripheral to
what his genre "really" does. I heartily encourage
would-be slipstream critics to involve themselves in
heady feuding about the "real nature" of their as-yet-
nonexistent genre. Bogus self-referentiality is a very
slipstreamish pursuit; much like this paragraph itself,
actually. See what I mean?
    My list is fragmentary. What's worse, many of
the books that are present probably don't "belong"
there. (I also encourage slipstream critics to weed
these books out and give convincing reasons for it.)
Furthermore, many of these books are simply
unavailable, without hard work, lucky accidents,
massive libraries, or friendly bookstore clerks in a
major postindustrial city. In many unhappy cases, I
doubt that the authors themselves think that anyone is
interested in their work. Many slipstream books fell
through the yawning cracks between categories, and
were remaindered with frantic haste.
    And I don't claim that all these books are
"good," or that you will enjoy reading them. Many
slipstream books are in fact dreadful, though they are
dreadful in a different way than dreadful science
fiction is. This list happens to be prejudiced toward
work of quality, because these are books which have
stuck in people's memory against all odds, and become
little tokens of possibility.
    I offer this list as a public service to
slipstream's authors and readers. I don't count myself
in these ranks. I enjoy some slipstream, but much of
it is simply not to my taste. This doesn't mean that
it is "bad," merely that it is different. In my
opinion, this work is definitely not SF, and is
essentially alien to what I consider SF's intrinsic
virtues.
    Slipstream does however have its own virtues,
virtues which may be uniquely suited to the perverse,
convoluted, and skeptical tenor of the postmodern era.
Or then again, maybe not. But to judge this genre by
the standards of SF is unfair; I would like to see it
free to evolve its own standards.
    Unlike the "speculative fiction" of the 60s,
slipstream is not an internal attempt to reform SF in
the direction of "literature." Many slipstream
authors, especially the most prominent ones, know or
care little or nothing about SF. Some few are "SF
authors" by default, and must struggle to survive in a
genre which militates against the peculiar virtues of
their own writing.
    I wish slipstream well. I wish it was an
acknowledged genre and a workable category, because
then it could offer some helpful, brisk competition to
SF, and force "Science Fiction" to redefine and
revitalize its own principles.
    But any true discussion of slipstream's genre
principles is moot, until it becomes a category as
well. For slipstream to develop and nourish, it must
become openly and easily available to its own
committed readership, in the same way that SF is
today. This problem I willingly leave to some
inventive bookseller, who is openminded enough to
restructure the rackspace and give these oppressed
books a breath of freedom.

THE SLIPSTREAM LIST

ACKER, KATHY - Empire of the Senseless
ACKROYD, PETER - Hawksmoor; Chatterton
ALDISS, BRIAN - Life in the West
ALLENDE, ISABEL - Of Love and Shadows; House of
Spirits
AMIS, KINGSLEY - The Alienation; The Green Man
AMIS, MARTIN - Other People; Einstein's Monsters
APPLE, MAX - Zap; The Oranging of America
ATWOOD, MARGARET - The Handmaids Tale
AUSTER, PAUL - City of Glass; In the Country of Last
Things
BALLARD, J. G. - Day of Creation; Empire of the Sun
BANKS, IAIN - The Wasp Factory; The Bridge
BANVILLE, JOHN - Kepler; Dr. Copernicus
BARNES, JULIAN - Staring at the Sun
BARTH, JOHN - Giles Goat-Boy; Chimera
BARTHELME, DONALD - The Dead Father
BATCHELOR, JOHN CALVIN - Birth of the People s
Republic of Antarctica
BELL, MADISON SMARTT - Waiting for the End of the
World
BERGER, THOMAS - Arthur Rex
BONTLY, THOMAS - Celestial Chess
BOYLE, T. CORAGHESSAN - Worlds End; Water Music
BRANDAO, IGNACIO - And Still the Earth
BURROUGHS, WILLIAM - Place of Dead Roads; Naked Lunch;
Soft Machine; etc.
CARROLL, JONATHAN - Bones of the Moon; Land of Laughs
CARTER, ANGELA - Nights at the Circus; Heroes and
Villains
CARY, PETER - Illywhacker; Oscar and Lucinda
CHESBRO, GEORGE M. - An Affair of Sorcerers
COETZEE, J. M. - Life and rimes of Michael K.
COOVER, ROBERT - The Public Burning; Pricksongs &
Descants
CRACE, JIM - Continent
CROWLEY, JOHN - Little Big; Aegypt
DAVENPORT, GUY - Da Vincis Bicycle; The Jules Verne
Steam Balloon
DISCH, THOMAS M. - On Wings of Song
DODGE, JIM - Not Fade Away
DURRELL, LAWRENCE - Tunc; Nunquam
ELY, DAVID - Seconds
ERICKSON, STEVE - Days Between Stations; Rubicon Beach
FEDERMAN, RAYMOND - The Twofold Variations
FOWLES, JOHN - A Maggot
FRANZEN, JONATHAN - The Twenty-Seventh City
FRISCH, MAX - Homo Faber; Man in the Holocene
FUENTES, CARLOS - Terra Nostra
GADDIS, WILLIAM - JR; Carpenters Gothic
GARDNER, JOHN - Grendel; Freddy's Book
GEARY, PATRICIA - Strange Toys; Living in Ether
GOLDMAN, WILLIAM - The Princess Bride; The Color of
Light
GRASS, GUNTER - The Tin Drum
GRAY, ALASDAIR - Lanark
GRIMWOOD, KEN - Replay
HARBINSON, W. A. - Genesis; Revelation; Otherworld
HILL, CAROLYN - The Eleven Million Mile High Dancer
HJVRTSBERG, WILLIAM - Gray Matters; Falling Angel
HOBAN, RUSSELL - Riddley Walker
HOYT, RICHARD - The Manna Enzyme
IRWIN, ROBERT - The Arabian Nightmares
ISKANDER, FAZIL - Sandro of Chegam; The Gospel
According to Sandro
JOHNSON, DENIS - Fiskadoro
JONES, ROBERT F. - Blood Sport; The Diamond Bogo
KINSELLA, W. P. - Shoeless Joe
KOSTER, R. M. - The Dissertation; Mandragon
KOTZWINKLE, WILLIAM - Elephant Bangs Train; Doctor
Rat, Fata Morgana
KRAMER, KATHRYN - A Handbook for Visitors From Outer
Space
LANGE, OLIVER - Vandenberg
LEONARD, ELMORE - Touch
LESSING, DORIS - The Four-Gated City; The Fifth Child
of Satan
LEVEN, JEREMY - Satan
MAILER, NORMAN - Ancient Evenings
MARINIS, RICK - A Lovely Monster
MARQUEZ, GABRIEL GARCIA - Autumn of the Patriarch; One
Hundred Years of Solitude
MATHEWS, HARRY - The Sinking of the Odradek Stadium
McEWAN, IAN - The Comfort of Strangers; The Child in
Time
McMAHON, THOMAS - Loving Little Egypt
MILLAR, MARTIN - Milk, Sulphate and Alby Starvation
MOONEY, TED - Easy Travel to Other Planets
MOORCOCK, MICHAEL - Laughter of Carthage; Byzantium
Endures; Mother London
MOORE, BRIAN - Cold Heaven
MORRELL, DAVID - The Totem
MORRISON, TONI - Beloved; The Song of Solomon
NUNN, KEN - Tapping the Source; Unassigned Territory
PERCY, WALKER - Love in the Ruins; The Thanatos
Syndrome
PIERCY, MARGE - Woman on the Edge of Time
PORTIS, CHARLES - Masters of Atlantis
PRIEST, CHRISTOPHER - The Glamour; The Affirmation
PROSE, FRANCINE - Bigfoot Dreams, Marie Laveau
PYNCHON, THOMAS - Gravity's Rainbow; V; The Crying of
Lot 49
REED, ISHMAEL - Mumbo Jumbo; The Terrible Twos
RICE, ANNE - The Vampire Lestat; Queen of the Damned
ROBBINS, TOM - Jitterbug Perfume; Another Roadside
Attraction
ROTH, PHILIP - The Counterlife
RUSHDIE, SALMON - Midnight's Children; Grimus; The
Satanic Verses
SAINT, H. F. - Memoirs of an Invisible Man
SCHOLZ, CARTER & HARCOURT GLENN - Palimpsests
SHEPARD, LUCIUS - Life During Wartime
SIDDONS, ANNE RIVERS - The House Next Door
SPARK, MURIEL - The Hothouse by the East River
SPENCER, SCOTT - Last Night at the Brain Thieves Ball
SUKENICK, RONALD - Up; Down; Out
SUSKIND, PATRICK - Perfume
THEROUX, PAUL - O-Zone
THOMAS, D. M. - The White Hotel
THOMPSON, JOYCE - The Blue Chair; Conscience Place
THOMSON, RUPERT - Dreams of Leaving
THORNBERG, NEWTON - Valhalla
THORNTON, LAWRENCE - Imagining Argentina
UPDIKE, JOHN - Witches of Eastwick; Rogers Version
VLIET, R. G. - Scorpio Rising
VOLLMAN, WILLIAM T. - You Bright and Risen Angels
VONNEGUT, KURT - Galapagos; Slaughterhouse-Five
WALLACE, DAVID FOSTER - The Broom of the System
WEBB, DON - Uncle Ovid's Exercise Book
WHITTEMORE, EDWARD - Nile Shadows; Jerusalem Poker;
Sinai Tapestry
WILLARD, NANCY - Things Invisible to See
WOMACK, JACK - Ambient; Terraplane
WOOD, BARI - The Killing Gift
WRIGHT, STEPHEN - M31: A Family Romance

Naravno, ova lista, kao i tvoja (ima preklapanja), može se proširivati, a spisateljica koja mi prva pada na pamet je J.C. Oates, zatim tu sasvim sigurno spada Haruki Murakami, itd. itd.

[gregorbikupil]

Uuuh    sjajno!!!!!!!!

Slipstream znači....

Ma znao sam ja da trebam počet s vama se družit...

[Mica Milovanovic]

Tako ga neki zovu - drugi ga zovu drugačije, ali to bi bilo otprilike ono što si naveo...

[gregorbikupil]

Da, to bi trebalo biti to. Spisak je sjajan - ej, a kada je sterling to napisao?

[Mica Milovanovic]

Davno - juli 1989.

[Mica Milovanovic]

Evo ti link odakle možeš da počneš traganje:

http://vectoreditors.wordpress.com/2006/09/07/now-all-slipstream-until-the-end/

[scallop]

Tako ga neki zovu - drugi ga zovu drugačije, ali to bi bilo otprilike ono što si naveo...

Mićo, ja donosim LESSING, DORIS - The Four-Gated City. Kupio sam za 50 centi.

[gregorbikupil]

Ovaj spisak je pravo blago... idem sad u pretrašivanje pojedinih knjiga i autora... Posla za mjesec dana....


Ako još neko nešto ima - pa - moli se ljepo....

[Mica Milovanovic]

Mićo, ja donosim LESSING, DORIS - The Four-Gated City. Kupio sam za 50 centi.

Super. Svetska ekonomska kriza ima i dobrih strana...

[gregorbikupil]

Evo ti link odakle možeš da počneš traganje:

http://vectoreditors.wordpress.com/2006/09/07/now-all-slipstream-until-the-end/

Super!!
Inače kombinujem ISFDB http://208.100.59.10/cgi-bin/index.cgi sa reviewima čitalaca na amazonu.

A šta ima novo - tu: http://www.sfsite.com/

[uglib]

A. Sanchez Pinol: Hladna koža
M. Bulgakov: Pseće srce
V.Pelevin: Vijesti iz Nepala, Kaciga užasa, Sveta knjiga vukodlaka

[scallop]

Šta je sa ovim sajtom? Jedina mu mana farba? Sa'će slabstrumujemo ili će da budemo servis za Gulov blog?

[gregorbikupil]

Evo pa sad - iz onog Sterlingovog spiska našao sam oh i oh - ali - jel neko čitao
Aldissovu Life in the west?

Imaču potpitanja još za par (pedesetak ) knjiga, ali da počnem s A kao Aldiss...

[Mica Milovanovic]

To ti je prva knjiga iz labavo povezanog serijala "The Squire Quartet " koji čine knjige: Life In The West (1980), Forgotten Life (1988), Remembrance Day (1993) i Somewhere East Of Life (1994).

Nisam čitao ništa od toga, ali pojedini kritičari kažu da je ta prva knjiga najbolja. Sam Aldiss kaže da ništa od toga nije SF, ali piscima nije za verovati...

Evo jednog kratkog prikaza:

Thomas C Squire, founder of the Society for Popular Aesthetics, one-time secret agent and successful hedonist faces a midlife crisis. That undermines the stability of his ancestral home in Norfolk. Following the creation of his TV documentary series, FRANKENSTEIN AMONG THE ARTS, Squire attends a conference of academics in Sicily. There, against a background of international rivalry, he becomes involved with the lovely if calculating Selina and the Russian Vasily. In counterpoint to the drama of the conference runs the story of Squire's private life: the horrifying circumstances of his father's death; his many affairs with women; and his fifteen-month separation from his wife. This brilliant novel, sometimes violent and always compassionate, moves from England to Sicily, from Singapore to the former Yugoslavia. LIFE IN THE WEST embodies the best characteristics of Brian Aldiss's writing: wit, human understanding, a fine turn of phrase and consummate storytelling.

[gregorbikupil]

Da da - taj isti opis našao sam na amazonu. Aldisa baš ni ne volim.

Dali ste mi posla.... dobro mi je to, traženje i pretraživanje ovakvih knjigica, bolje od golih žena i pornografije (osim lesbične)

[Mica Milovanovic]

Ni ja. Helikonijiu nisam mogao da završim...

[gregorbikupil]

Pa se sada mučim s Jonathanom Carrollom.

Tri njegove knjige me nekako vuku - je li neko čitao
"Land of laughs"?

"Voice of our shadow" i "Bones of the moon" skužio sam, ali - u čemu su elementi fantastičnoga u "Land of laughs"?

[Mica Milovanovic]

Džonatana Kerola je veoma teško objašnjavati. Veruj na reč da ima značajnih fantastičnih elemenata i da je više nego vredan čitanja...

Ovaj roman obajavljen je i na srpskom u prevodu Gorana Dimitrijevića i to u MONOLITU 9 1995. godine.

[Ghoul]

meni se, recimo, ZEMLJA SMEHA ne dopada - ali ja sam u manjini po tom pitanju.
svuše banalna intonacija i mediokritetski likovi za tu would-be fantastičnu priču.

[Meho Krljic]

Ja je se jedva sećam... Dakle nije ostavila neki utisak na mene.

[Boban]

Meni je Dž. Kerol sinonim za besmisleno pisanje ni o čemu...

[Ghoul]

Meni je Dž. Kerol sinonim za besmisleno pisanje ni o čemu...

dakle, još uvek postoje stvari oko kojih s bobanom mogu da se složim.

ali, ako je već tako, pitam se što je kerola turao za udarni deo - tj roman- u monolitu?

[Mica Milovanovic]

Promaklo ti je da je urednik tog Monolita Oto Oltvanji...

[Boban]

Ja sam pobornik, pristalica i poštovalac klasičnog načina pripovedanja; gde priča ima glavu i rep, svrhu i jasan smisao, gde je književno delo postavljeno poput šahovskog problema, bez suvišnih figura na tabli. Uvažavam da postoje i drugačiji pristupi, dapače, spremno sam ih objavljivao u prošlosti, jer sam smatrao da kao urednik retkih izdanja te vrste kod nas, a povremeno i jedini, imam obavezu da budem predstavnik svih, a ne samo svoje partije.
Moje uvažavanje različitih mišljenja i pristupa donelo je mnogo dobrog za jugoslovensku i srpsku fantastiku u prošlom veku, ali kao što neko reče, ljudski soj kada im se događa nešto dobro smatraju, bože moj, da je to sasvim normalno, a jedino cvile kada im nešto nije po volji.

[gregorbikupil]

Evo još jedne koja fali u svim predloženim spiskovima, čak i u mome:

Simmons - Songs of Kali.

To je pravi užas. Ali užas bez natprirodnog. Natprirodni elementi u tu priču ulaze drugdje, priču pokreču, ali nisu bitni.

Prava stvar! Ma šta vam pričam, svi ste to čitali....

[mac]

Neki bi ovde rekli i da je užas koliko je Simons netolerantan prema njemu stranim kulturama.

[Boban]

Simons je pljuvao i po Srbima; zamisli tek kako su mu Indijci bili odvratni.

[gregorbikupil]

Neki bi ovde rekli i da je užas koliko je Simons netolerantan prema njemu stranim kulturama.

Da....
Ali kad čitaš što vidi kad se vozi kroz taj fakin grad, nekako znaš, kako bi se i ti osječao da sediš u tom autu...
A tek na pločniku...
A tek da tamo s ostalima živiš i spavaš na pločniku....

Uz čitanje tog užasa čovek postane zahvalan za sve što ima.

Baš sad čitam Kiplinga - 100 godina pre Simmonsa on je u svojim kratkim pričama Indiji posravio sličan spomenik....

[scallop]

Neka se voze po svojim predgrađima. Nema razlike. Slikao sam tu njihovu usranu štroku i nema razlike.

I Bajden neće ništa videti. Prazne ulice i spuštene roletne. Pa, to je i Milošević mogao da uradi, umesto da zove narod na ulice.

[gregorbikupil]

Neka se voze po svojim predgrađima. Nema razlike. Slikao sam tu njihovu usranu štroku i nema razlike.

Da...
Tu imaš pravo.

[Melkor]

Something weird this way comes

Meet the 21st century's new literary movement

By Rick Klaw, 06.01.2010. San Antonio Current

Early in the aughts, a new creative force emerged. Worldwide political events, crystallized by the 1999 Seattle WTO protests and the terrorist attacks of 9/11, energized a self-aware readership that embraced New Weird, the 21st century's first major new literary movement. Books such as China Miéville's Perdido Street Station (2000), Jeff VanderMeer's City of Saints and Madmen (2001), Paul Di Filippo's A Year in a Linear City (2002), K. G. Bishop's The Etched City (2003), and Steph Swainston's The Year of Our War (2004) birthed a revolutionary, real-world, postmodern literature that often included surreal elements found in urban fantasy, horror, science fiction, and political thrillers.

This hard-to-define genre engendered two major 2003 debates. The magazine Third Alternative and the writer M. John Harrison, who as part of the 1960's New Wave supplied a seminal influence for the new writers, facilitated lengthy online discussions exploring the emerging movement. Harrison first introduced the term "New Weird" to the public, though it most likely evolved from a poolside chat between Miéville and Peter Straub at a Fort Lauderdale conference. The name pays homage to two movement progenitors: the 1980's New Horror (aka Splatterpunk, best typified by Clive Barker) and the New Wave.

More than a decade earlier, in a July 1989 article for SF Eye #5, Bruce Sterling, himself a major player in the 20th-century movement Cyberpunk, which continues to  influence our current internet-driven culture, postulated the concept of yet another genre, which he dubbed "Slipstream" and defined as "a kind of writing which simply makes you feel very strange; the way that living in the 20th century makes you feel, if you are a person of a certain sensibility." In the 1990s, the burgeoning Interstitial Arts movement embraced this notion in an attempt to define creations that fall between traditional style boundaries. The New Weird, while arguably an aspect of both ideas, has since developed its own identity.

From the online discussions, VanderMeer generated a definition. In the 2007 anthology The New Weird (co-edited with Ann VanderMeer), he presents a summation of his findings:

"...a type of urban, secondary-world fiction that subverts the romanticized ideas about place found in traditional fantasy, largely by choosing realistic, complex real-world models as the jumping off point for creation of settings that may combine elements of both science fiction and fantasy. New Weird has a visceral, in-the-moment quality that often uses elements of surreal or transgressive horror for its tone, style, and effects — in combination with the stimulus of influence from New Wave writers or their proxies (including also such forebears as Mervyn Peake and the French/English Decadents). New Weird fictions are acutely aware of the modern world, even if in disguise, but not always overtly political. As part of this awareness of the modern world, New Weird relies for its visionary power on a "surrender to the weird" that isn't, for example, hermetically sealed in a haunted house on the moors or in a cave in Antarctica. The "surrender" (or "belief") of the writer can take many forms, some of them even involving the use of postmodern techniques that do not undermine the surface reality of the text."

Of course the earliest New Weird authors began working in the style well before it was acknowledged as a movement. Miéville and VanderMeer, often seen as leaders of the movement, produced works containing New Weird concepts for smaller presses throughout the '90s. The development of a moniker provided a marketable identity for publishers, which resulted in much larger venues for the work. Both authors' careers benefited from the increased exposure, much like those later identified with the movement, most notably Jeffrey Ford and Jay Lake.

While the cultural impact of the New Weird cannot be properly identified for at least another decade, the movement's reach has slowly seeped into other media. The popular TV show Lost, and acclaimed films Pan's Labyrinth and Children of Men exhibit several New Weird hallmarks, demonstrating the New Weird infiltration into 21st-century popular consciousness.

[Mica Milovanovic]

Sve je ovo lepo sročio, ali mnogi tvrde da je New Weird već prošlost...

[Melkor]

...pri cemu prednjace levo nastrojeni pisci "nove space opere" i, sada vec pokojnog, new weird-a...

Proslost na nivou labavog covenanta pisaca, moguce. Ali na nivou ideje i uticaja... Videcemo Mievillovog Krakena u maju i sta on donosi.

[entelehija]

Uzeo sam da iščitavam Flatland od Abbotta, zanimljivo štivo...
Nije prevođen na srpski/ hrvatski?

[Mica Milovanovic]

Ja mislim da nije...

[zakk]

Meni se čini da sam video neki odlomak, al gde, kad, šta, kako... pojma nemam :/