While reading David Shield's Reality Hunger I thought my torture would never end. This novel is so overrated and useless. I wouldn't even classify this book as a novel due to it being so gimmicky and Shields is very much a hypocrite in my opinion.
David Shields talks about his boredom with the “traditional form of the novel.” I do believe that there are numerous genre-bending novels around, in which the authors of those books wanted to write a form of literature that was creative, nontraditional, and different. He makes broad assumptions as if speaking for all readers saying what they want and saying what writers therefore should do. In my opinion this book is a waste of time and Shields is an intellectual exhibitionist who was desperately seeking attention and to be the talk of the town. …show more content…
Shields novel is not original, which he argues originality in his book, saying nothing is new and inventive, everything is borrowed from somewhere. He talks about writers saying and writing the same things and makes a connection to music explaining how artists sample previous records. If that is the case then Shields idea to write this book is not original it is simply borrowed as well. I am pretty sure that this book does not do anything that writers before Shields haven't already done. I do however believe that there are new ideas circulating around. If I say something and someone else says the same thing, it was pretty much unintentional and I do not think it belittles a good point or promotes theft/ plagiarism. People do think alike and I believe that doesn't make their ideas unoriginal. I think it is how someone chooses to make an idea better that makes them stand out from the
David Shields talks about his boredom with the “traditional form of the novel.” I do believe that there are numerous genre-bending novels around, in which the authors of those books wanted to write a form of literature that was creative, nontraditional, and different. He makes broad assumptions as if speaking for all readers saying what they want and saying what writers therefore should do. In my opinion this book is a waste of time and Shields is an intellectual exhibitionist who was desperately seeking attention and to be the talk of the town. …show more content…
Shields novel is not original, which he argues originality in his book, saying nothing is new and inventive, everything is borrowed from somewhere. He talks about writers saying and writing the same things and makes a connection to music explaining how artists sample previous records. If that is the case then Shields idea to write this book is not original it is simply borrowed as well. I am pretty sure that this book does not do anything that writers before Shields haven't already done. I do however believe that there are new ideas circulating around. If I say something and someone else says the same thing, it was pretty much unintentional and I do not think it belittles a good point or promotes theft/ plagiarism. People do think alike and I believe that doesn't make their ideas unoriginal. I think it is how someone chooses to make an idea better that makes them stand out from the