Martin Amis is rude...

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by BenG

(and I mostly like Oprah, though I don't watch her very often)

I can't stand the flinger of anti-scientific woo, and wouldn't be able to conciser being associated with her as anything other than an insult.

[Clash]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

I'd venture that, for most of the world, Martin Amis existing is news. I've been an avid reader all my life, and never heard of the man before this post.

I definitely agree.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by charleski

Sure, Martin Amis is well-known to be arrogant and over-prone to self-importance, but I have a really hard time working out what is supposed to be rude about his remarks:

Maybe you're not finding the remarks rude because you're leaving out the most offensive part:

I say, 'If I had a serious brain injury I might well write a children's book', but otherwise the idea of being conscious of who you're directing the story to is anathema to me, because, in my view, fiction is freedom and any restraints on that are intolerable.

I would never write about someone that forced me to write at a lower register than what I can write. [Emphasis added.]

[HappyMartin]

Sheesh. Even I have have heard of him and I am pretty ignorant and live on the extreme southern end of nowhere. But then I love rude people.

[Xoanon]

I've heard of him, but so far I've managed to avoid reading any of his work. He's one of those literary types who always go around with a face that looks like they have a little bit of poo stuck under their nose.

[aceflor]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

Sheesh. Even I have have heard of him and I am pretty ignorant and live on the extreme southern end of nowhere. But then I love rude people.

Welcome in the club of the ignorant people who indeed have heard of Martin Amis (the upgrade being having read one of his books). Seriously though, he is really well known in Europe, not only in the UK (which by the way is not the same as Britain, but that's for another one of those oh so appreciated "let's bash each other joyfully" threads).

On a side note, is it just me, or is the "ambience" of mobileread getting rougher every day ? Or is there an open competition for the rudest comment ?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by doreenjoy

I think he's actually saying he could never write a young protagonist. It's not the audience he's saying is at a lower level, it's the character, IMO.

Given that he's talking about HIMSELF, I really don't see that this can be considered rude. He's not talking about childrens' authors in general.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Given that he's talking about HIMSELF, I really don't see that this can be considered rude. He's not talking about childrens' authors in general.

Well, as the OP, it was me who claimed that he was being rude. On the basis that he claimed he could only consider writing a children's book if he suffered a brain injury I took him to be implying that those who do write children's books are functionally equivalent to the brain damaged...in other words, less intellectually able than he is. Which I think is quite rude.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by TGS

Well, as the OP, it was me who claimed that he was being rude. On the basis that he claimed he could only consider writing a children's book if he suffered a brain injury I took him to be implying that those who do write children's books are functionally equivalent to the brain damaged...in other words, less intellectually able than he is. Which I think is quite rude.

I saw the intervew in question: it was a part of the very interesting "Faulks on Fiction" TV series that's currently being shown on BBC 4. It came across to me that he was simply saying that he personally is not able to write at a "lower level" than he does. I didn't take it as a general statement about people who do write for children. But I may of course be wrong .

[Billi]

"I say, 'If I had a serious brain injury I might well write a children's book', but otherwise the idea of being conscious of who you're directing the story to is anathema to me, because, in my view, fiction is freedom and any restraints on that are intolerable.
"I would never write about someone that forced me to write at a lower register than what I can write."

You say:
Dealing with children tires us out.
You are right.
You say:
'Cause we need to kneel to their perceptions.
Kneel, bend down low, belittle ourselves.
You are wrong.
That's not what fatigues us. But - that we have to climb up to their feelings. Climb up, stretch ourselves out, stand on tiptoe, reach out.
That we don't hurt them.

Janusz Korczak (When I am little again, 1925)

[DDHarriman]

Hello

For the ones who never read/do not know the man, I advise to try de 1986 book “Money” (http://www.amazon.com/Money-Martin-Amis/dp/0140088911).

Best regards,

[januaryman]

He may very well be an excellent writer. I am familiar with and have enjoyed his Dad's writing; I read Kingsley didn't think much of his son's abilities.

That said, fine writers are not necessarily fine people. In fact, most authors whom I enjoy were/are just awful people. Usually reading a bio of an author causes me to be disappointed in the person or to reconsider my reading habits.

[charleski]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Maybe you're not finding the remarks rude because you're leaving out the most offensive part:

There's nothing offensive there. If he were saying, "Authors who write children's books are brain-injured," that would be a very different thing. But he isn't.

Originally Posted by TGS

I took him to be implying that those who do write children's books are functionally equivalent to the brain damaged.

You made an inference which was not supported by the text. You fell into the trap, as did several others. Amis set out to get children's authors to reveal their latent insecurities, and some neatly obliged him by jumping into the pit head first. If the responses had instead been something like, "I must commiserate with Mr Amis, as it's always hard for an author to discover that they lack the ability needed for a certain type of fiction," then he'd have ended up with egg on his face.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by charleski

There's nothing offensive there. If he were saying, "Authors who write children's books are brain-injured," that would be a very different thing. But he isn't.

You're joking, right?

He says he can't write a children's book because he can't make himself write at the necessary level such a book requires.

He says he could write at that level if he had a serious brain injury.

You do the math.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by charleski

You made an inference which was not supported by the text.

You made an assertion which is unsupported by the text. My inference was however supported by the text - otherwise it wouldn't have been an inference.