art made from other art

I just got this book I'm supposed to review. I mean, I volunteered. I thought it sounded good. now I have it, and I don't really get it. it's like an extreme version of the hysterical realism thing of bringing in lots of pop culture icons and making them do fucked-up things that "interesting" people would do - it's so overdone that there's nothing else to it. it's just that, with no real people in it. the author has written on other blogs and publications that he had a "non-fucked up childhood" and that he is still pretty normal, but that he ended up writing all these fucked-up things that he made up. I ask myself, how did he think of them? how does one who has had a non-fucked-up life write about fucked-up things? one can only plagiarise. that is my opinion, as someone who has had a not-fucked-up life so far. I have seen fucked-up things - on TV. I have heard of them from other people. I have read about them in books. if I were to start "making up stories" with fucked-up things in them, I'd have to admit to myself that I stole the things in my art from other art. which is kind of what I am trying to avoid.

look, there are other things to write about besides celebrities and people whose lives are falling apart. I guess those things are guaranteed to make good stories. but I want them to go somewhere. I don't the point to be something vague and self-affirming, like "celebrity culture is demented" or "isn't life fucked up?" and that is what this book is basically telling me, so far.

of course, if you couldn't guess this already, I am just telling this to myself. I used to write stupid stories that had nothing to do with my life. they had messages that I thought were "good." what good is, I don't really know yet, but I do think your work should somewhat resemble your life. it doesn't have to be your actual life, it can be your imaginary life. just as long as it's yours. if you spend a lot of time wondering whether cancer is caused by eating a lot of hormone-soaked meat, you can write a story in which this is a reality, and it will be effective, because of your interest in the subject. you have imagined that this is possible, which as far as writing is concerned is kind of like "living" it.

if you sit down and say "I'm going to write a story about this guy who has colitis and is really pathetic and is jealous of a celebrity, because the culture is concerned about being pathetic and being famous", you are writing it for the wrong reasons. similarly, if sometimes I sit down to write a story "proving" how "wrong" certain ideas are, that story will be too polemical, and it will suck. the idea has to come from somewhere personal, and somewhere constructive.

I have no way of proving that the guy writing these stories sat down with those thoughts in mind. I just get that feeling, because it shows in the writing. so I don't know what to do with the book. I guess I'll just finish reading it.