56yrs • M
A CTL of 1 means that WolfLarsen is a contributing member of Captain Cynic.
|The New Social Realism
The New Social Realism
An interview with Wolf Larsen
(for Albrecht Durer – yes I interviewed myself – yippee!)
Question: So what's up with this new writing style Wolf?
Wolf Larsen: Partly I was getting tired of my former writing style. It was a blast at first! That run-on sentence that was 70,000 words long written to the beat of Afro-Brazilian drums – that was fun! Writing books that didn't make any sense like Ten Thousand Penises in Your Ear, I had fun with that too. That was supposed to be a bizarre novel about a bizarre world where racist CEOs and politicians think they're God, but the novel became something much more bizarre than that! Then came symphonies written with poetry and then an opera and plays all written in an increasingly jumbled frantic psychotic combination of surrealism, Impressionism, cubism, futurism, and just about everything else all boiling out of the pot like some diseased creation of the mad scientist with a pen. But I got bored with that, so now it's time for something new.
Question: Well, this new style Wolf seems rather simplistic, no?
Wolf Larsen: Yes, it's super Hemingway-ish. But anyway I have flirted with a super-blunt super-realism before in the novel Pricks Cunts & Motherfuckers: The Novel about New York City. Even though I have enjoyed playing with all the psychedelic wildness of images procreating on the page like super-powered spermatozoa, I've also enjoyed shoving the reader face-first into the excrement filled toilet of reality, or the real world. And I think that is what my latest writing style is.
Question: Does the latest writing style have anything to do with your presidential campaign for 2012?
Wolf Larsen: Absolutely not. This would've happened regardless of whether I decided to run for president or not. Besides, as a write-in candidate I know I'm probably the only person that's going to vote for me. (Laughs)
Question: Undoubtably some people will accuse you of opportunism for having the balls to do something different and interview yourself?
Wolf Larsen: If I had a dollar for every time that I've been criticized for doing something different I'd be richer than Warren Buffett by now! (Laughs) I'm basically going to do whatever the hell I want to.
Question: So what prompted this new change in literary style besides wanting to do something new?
Wolf Larsen: Well I was getting bored and going to go in a different direction anyway. However, being in the midst of the Second Great Depression probably has a lot to do with embarking on a road that I might as well call Neo-SocialRealism, although I could just as well call it Super-Hemingway-ism or I could even call it Super-Ball-ism because I've got the balls to write whatever I want to.
Question: And where do you think this new style is going?
Wolf Larsen: The hell that I know! Do I look like I got a crystal ball or something?
Question: What did you think of the movie In Time?
Wolf Larsen: That's a kick ass movie! That's one of the best movies I've seen in a long time! That's Neo-SocialRealism in a futuristic sci-fi twist. To me that movie seems like a wonderful and very entertaining critique of capitalism. I hate boring! And that movie is not boring for a minute! Even better than the movie In Time however was the Soviet poster art that I saw at the Art Institute in Chicago recently. Of course, not all of it was of equal quality, but overall it was outstanding! Although some of it was bad some of it was also very good, and proof that social realism can be a great art form! I think the movie In Time also shows that social realism, even in a futuristic sci-fi context, can be awesome!
Question: But isn't social realism out of vogue?
Wolf Larsen: Not when you're in the midst Of the Second Great Depression! And the Second Great Depression is worldwide. So the possibilities of this Neo-SocialRealism is worldwide.
Question: But social realism in people's minds is linked to Stalinism and to the Stalinist governments of the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, and Cuba. And Stalinism appears to be dead.
Wolf Larsen: No doubt Stalinism appears to be dead. And you know as a Trotskyist sympathizer I have absolutely no sympathy for Stalinism. However, I think that Neo-SocialRealism has vast potential precisely because this time around social realism will not be influenced by Stalinist hacks. Stalinism is dead. However, social realism shall be reborn without Stalinism!
Question: But don't you think that politics and literature should be kept separate?
Wolf Larsen: Look, look at the world around you! Why can't we write about the world around us?! Why can't we write about this great human tidal wave of suffering that's engulfing the world at this very moment! You have to be blind not to see it. You're in the midst of the Second Great Depression, why not write about it? I myself was contemplating my navel before when I wrote all that crazy wild creative stuff. But at this point in time the real world is far more interesting to me than anything else! At this point in time, at least for me, the real world is where the story is. The real world is now my inspiration. Others can do as they please.
Question: But what about other writers, poets, painters, sculptors that are looking at the real world and thinking that there's a lot of great material out there. After all, it's a great human saga – it's the giant epic of the Second Great Depression! Maybe some – or a lot of them – are also thinking some of the same things that you're thinking.
Wolf Larsen: In that case I say that writers, poets, painters, and filmmakers should all join together in turning their pens, paintbrushes, and movie cameras against their masters! Social realism is reborn!
Question: But maybe there are writers, poets, sculptors, etc. who want to turn their pens, paintbrushes, and movie cameras against the privileged 1%, but want to do so by some other means besides social realism. Who the hell is Wolf Larson to say that Neo-SocialRealism is the rule of the day?
Wolf Larsen: You know something. You're right! People should express themselves any damn way they choose. There must be 1,000 different ways to turn our pens, paintbrushes, and movie cameras against the 1% besides just Neo-SocialRealism. There must be as many ways as there are poets, painters, sculptors, and moviemakers. Perhaps we can all march forward together against the 1%, but each can march in his own individual style. And let's make sure that we don't become co-opted by the liberal wing of the 1% and their prostitute-politicians in the Democratic Party. There is absolutely no difference between the liberal wing of the privileged 1% and the conservative wing in the 1%, just as there is no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. We must jealously guard our independence from bourgeois pigs like that! It seems like they're always trying to censor us one way or another with their liberal political correctness or conservative religious Puritanism. We should be able to write, paint, or film whatever we want to!
Question: Just one more thing Wolf, perhaps this Neo-SocialRealism thing is just some passing phase? Maybe soon you'll be changing your literary style as often as you change your underwear.
Wolf Larsen: Hey, that sounds like fun! But right now I'm surrounded by so much human misery in this Second Great Depression that reality itself feels like a vast tragic Dostoyevsky novel of massive proportions all around me! So for me at least Neo-SocialRealism is what's playing now.
Question: Does Neo-SocialRealism mean you're going to use the Queen's English?
Wolf Larsen: I'll use the Queen's English when it suits me, although I am fond of run-on sentences and I will trample all over correct grammar whenever I see fit. I'll use correct grammar when it suits me, and I'll smash it into pieces when it gets in my way.
Copyright 2011 by Wolf Larsen. Advance permission is given to anyone wishing to publish and/or distribute this work to do so as long as no alterations are made to the work, credit is given to the author, and the intent of such publication and/or distribution is not hostile.