Love his prose or find him a digressive, circular-reasoning gas bag, Chuck Klosterman is an unavoidable fixture on the hipster-lit scene — and he’s almost as polarizing as The Hold Steady (almost). The Phoenix picked up on this phenomenon and published an extensive profile of the guy. An excerpt (via Gawker):
?Oh my God!? gasps a Boston University student as he enters the room. ?I?m like a little schoolgirl!? In her excitement, she spits on my knee.She is Amanda and she has not just seen Brad Pitt. Or David Ortiz. Or the Crocodile Hunter?s ghost. The 34-year-old bearded dude who just caused Amanda to expectorate is not bringing sexy back. Rather, he is a six-foot-two native North Dakotan who has been called everything from ?the voice of a generation? to ?the new Hunter S. Thompson? to a ?saggy ass-head.? He is wearing a jean jacket that could have been an iron-on canvas for Guns N? Roses back patches 20 years ago. He is Charles John ?Chuck? Klosterman: pop-culture critic, four-time author, celebrity profiler, Esquire columnist, ESPN Page 2 sportswriter, former Spin senior editor, unrepentant Billy Joel fan. And he makes girls spit.
If you?re familiar with Klosterman?s writing, this shouldn?t be surprising. If you?ve never heard of the guy, it might help to know that Seth Cohen read one of his books on an episode of The O.C. (Culturally speaking, this is the low-rent equivalent of Natalie Portman?s character name-checking the Shins in Garden State.)
Klosterman (pronounced Kloh-ster-man) became a prime-time-TV prop alongside Death Cab for Cutie and the Killers partly by publishing four books in five years that examined American life through the prism of pop culture…
…
It?s also worth noting that people who expend mental energy thinking about Chuck Klosterman do so in three overlapping ways: a) being jealous of him, b) hating him, or c) loving him.
…
In the past, people like this have been called disciples in the ?cult of Klosterman.? Looking around the Boston University Bookstore, where he?s giving the first of two readings today, I can confirm that this is not an opinion or a theory but a statement of fact. At one in the afternoon on a late-September Monday, about 130 college-age kids who should probably be in class are seated with Klosterman?s books laid flat on their laps, like Bibles in church. About 50 more are relegated to the standing-room section of the foyer, where they?ll remain listening for the entire 90 minutes.
We know the BU bookstore well, and the visual of bookish hipsters in congregation, replacing the usual flow of meatheads and Eurotrash, is both refreshing and alarming (are bookish hipsters the new meatheads? Or worse — the new Eurotrash?!). But like Chuck, we digress.
Not that we want to turn this into a referendum on his relevance (who are we kidding), but you guys have thoughts on his work? Out of obligation (and, let’s face it, with some enjoyment), Stereogum’s made it through all of his books, save the Led Zep-referencing IV. Fargo Rock is much-maligned but can be witty (and did allow the Trixter fans in us to rest easy — kidding), while Sex, Drugs, And Cocoa Puffs and Killing Yourself To Live are remarkably engaging and horribly self-important, respectively. But then, so is most indie rock.
 |
 |
He’s an entertaining writer and all, but I can’t help but have a problem with a writer who does more drugs than the bands he writes about.
I saw him do an in-store in Madison a few weeks back. I was entertained. I’ve only read one of his books.
Everytime some halfwit compares Klosterman to a modern day Hunter S. Thompson…I die a little inside. Dude is vastly overrated,
I’ve read them all, and the one is mostly his Esquire and Spin articles I have read anyway. S, D & CPs is probably the funniest book I’ve ever read in my life. Killing Yourself to Live is easily his worst, which is better than most people’s best. Still, tough to get through. Look forward to reading that BP article.
I really like Klosterman and I’ve read all 3 of his books. Funny, insightful stuff. Spin has sucked ass ever since he left.
I agree with narchiba. I wouldn’t lump Cocoa Puffs in with Killing. CK’s at his best in the short, pithy essay and at his worst when he’s trying to maintain some kind of book-length thread. In Killing, he took a great premise–visiting the locations of rock deaths–and muddied that journey by describing the death of a personal and confusingly obscured long-term relationship. That book just didn’t work.
People who don’t like Klosterman are going to Hell.
I’m a big fan, but even I’m sure he thinks this “voice of a generation” tag is ridiculous.
Everyone seems to have major issues with “KILLING…” but am I the only one who loved it? I mean, being in love w/ different people acorss the country and driving around relating comparing “Slow Ride” to “Free Ride” is – sadly – completely relatable to me. I’d much rather read that stuff than “I’m currently at where Kurt Cobain died. It’s sad.” I almost want to say that the way it was marketed – as Chuck’s awesome insight into where and how rock stars died – maybe had something to do with why people hate it so much. Had it been billed more as a memoir, it may have won some hearts.
It should have been called Killing Yourself to Read. Rock City and Cocoa Puffs were both teriffic, though. What I don’t get is this: how in hell is Chuck Klosterman a “polarizing figure??” I mean, his stuff is entertaining enough — occasionally thought-provoking, even — but WTF? Whichever side of the “debate” you’re on, you have to admit he’s opining about culture on a fairly fluffy level. Why do people have strong opinions either way with this guy??
i’ve enjoyed all of his books so far – there is nothing amazing or pulitzer-prize worthy about, but good eye candy to pass the time that produces the occasional chuckle.
for me, Fargo Rock City is his best work – possibly because i also had a childhood obsession with hair metal and it hit a lot of nerves.
Klosterman is no Thompson- not even in the slightest. Apples and oranges.
And if you’re comparing the two because they both write about smoking pot- you might as well throw in a bunch of other authors as well.
I’ve read lots of Klosterman, and haven’t viewed his drug use as anything but casual and certainly not excessive.
“Killing Yourself to Live” was engaging but ultimately disapointing, and I’ve enjoyed pretty much everything of his I’ve read (haven’t read the new book yet though.)
I still think he’s a very talented opinion writer, but he’s no Thompson.
Hunter was a damn superhero mutant.
I liked SD&CP and KYTL, but I just finished IV, and what a disappointment. It was like a Best of Compilation of his writing, what a joke, there’s $24 I’m not getting back.
Hunter S. Thompson? No
Bob Greene? Yes
I loved SD&CP and KYTL as well. I’m in the middle of IV and I’m not disappointed at all. It is a best of compilation, it’s not pretending to be anything else. I haven’t read FRC yet, but I’m planning on it.
I don’t know how people find Klosterman entertaining, or worse, how they can call him a writer/journalist. It’s like calling Dane Cook a comedian.
I think too many people have lowered their standards and expectations when it comes to literature, journalism, comedy, music, etc. and instead of fighting it, they just latch on to those who can fake it. Klosterman is such an example. Perhaps I should stop striving to be unique and inventive and just write drivel for mass consumption. Apparently appealing to dimwits makes you a good entertainer.
I was hoping this thread would be chalk full of bile and rock-throwing, but frankly, I’m a little put off by the evenhandedness.
Maybe I’d be better off checking out a Hold Steady post or perhaps something about Apple Computers.
Justin please. High horse parking is around back. Klosterman is entertainment. He doesn’t claim to be Tolstoy. He makes fun of the fact that he is even considered a journalist. He makes people laugh. And sometimes that’s all one is looking for at the end of the day, or on the crapper, or whenever you choose to do your reading. And for the record, you just posted your rant on Stereogum (which we all love obviously, but let’s face it, ain’t gonna be taught in academia anytime soon).
he’s amazing through simplicity. like Nate said, CK doesn’t claim to be anything he is not, and when he veers toward pretension, he calls himself out. The man is the embodiment of the music we all know and love, and bottom line is, he’s entertaining. It’s light and comedic writing, that often pays off with something so right articulated in a very universal way. that said, i’ve read all of his work multiple times, with the exception of IV which i’ll be finishing today. call me fan #1.
oh, and how bout that hold steady CD.
He’s fantastic, and for how self-important his writing can be, he’s a pretty humble guy (or at least comes of like that at book signings).
Wasn’t there supposed to be a contest to win a signed book or something?
I guess I’m in the minority with KYTL being my favorite. I agree with Jim, who said it was completely relatable, and also the part about it being marketed wrong. That being said, I thought IV was not just a disappointment, but almost a jack. I felt wallet-jacked. I had read half the book already in Spin or wherever, and as a collection of essays, it pales in comparison to Cocoa Puffs.
Also, of my friends who’ve read SDCP & KYTL, the females all hated Killing with a passion, and Chuck’s writing in general. The guys like all of it.
Eh.
I liked his New York Times Sunday Magazine article about accidently pouring way too many red pepper flakes on his slice of pizza and eating it anyway.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/magazine/30funny_humor.html?ex=1304049600&en=9285c8c9e7209dd4&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
I’d just like to point out that this:
“Klosterman (pronounced Kloh-ster-man)”
is the worst pronounciation aid ever. All it adds to the name itself are a meaningless ‘h’ and those ever-elusive syllable breaks. Boo-urns.
I’d just like to point out that everybody I’ve ever heard say his name has said it ‘Klos-ter-man.’ In actuality, it’s more like ‘Klow-ster-man’ than ‘Klos-ter-man.’ So there.
Nate, I wasn’t bashing Klosterman so much as the people who claim he is a genius or even a decent journalist. I’ve given the guy plenty of chances and while he does call himself out sometimes, he also bolsters his opinion above that of many of his peers.
Right now, much of journalism (especially of the music variety) is a contest on how much bullshit you can feed people and how smart of an ass you can be while doing it. I understand it’s the latest trend (like bashing the Hold Steady or announcing your love of the band America) but it’s already outlived its welcome.
P.S. In S, D, and CP, Klosterman argues in one of his third-person intro pieces that apples and oranges are essentially the same. So if you think Hunter Thompson and Klosterman are just different — like “apples and oranges” — then by Klosterman’s logic, they are essentially the same.
In truth, they are not alike at all. But this is just an example of how Klosterman’s circular logic is more bombastic than reasoned. I like his stuff a lot, but I think he’s full of shit, and that doesn’t make me like him any less.
P.S. In S, D, and CP, Klosterman argues in one of his third-person intro pieces that apples and oranges are essentially the same. So if you think Hunter Thompson and Klosterman are just different — like “apples and oranges” — then by Klosterman’s logic, they are essentially the same.
In truth, they are not alike at all. But this is just an example of how Klosterman’s arguments are more bombastic than reasoned. I like his stuff a lot, I think he’s full of shit, but that doesn’t make me like him any less. I think it might actually make me like him more.
WOW! You guys. Did you realize that Stereogum is in the cut piece of the article?!?!?!?
On being approached in public… I ask if this happens a lot and then mention how I’d read one blogger saying that he’d run into Klosterman and he was rude. He asks what the blogger actually said.
Me: It was the guy who runs Stereogum, he said something like, ‘Oh, I?m excited to read Chuck Klosterman’s new book, I really enjoy his work even though he was rude to me when I tried to introduce myself to him.’
CK: Well, what were his expectations? What did he think? I don?t know. Maybe he thought he would introduce himself I would go, ‘I loooooove Stereoblog.’ I love it. I can?t wait until we?re best buddies. Let?s hang out and listen to, y?know, Creedence Clearwater Revival B-Sides, you know. But it sucks because he?ll always think I?m a rude guy now. The fact that he wrote it is crazy.
[As we discuss paying for the bill that's just arrived (fyi: I expense it), I explain that even if he doesn't feel famous, music bloggers would be inclined to post about running into him, because, well, he is Chuck Klosterman.]
CK: I suppose I would say that’s an example of how the Internet can be bad. I don?t want to be rude to people. Maybe something was going on that day. I don?t remember meeting this guy. I don?t know what he looks like. But the thing is part of me doesn?t care at all ? like what difference does it make? But part of me does care, because well, it?s sort of like, it?s just as easy as to be nice to people than to be a jerk. I wasn?t even a jerk!
What does he remember? So he wrote on this blog that he ran into me on the street or at a party?
Me: I think he said you were rude to him on the street.
[At this point, I move onto the blacklisted question he answers on this page.]
…
STEREOBLOG!!!!
klosterman is overrated. i read sex drugs and cocoa puffs and enjoyed it, but he’s way too annoying at times and writes as if he thinks he’s a musical prophet/god.
Say what you will about Killing Yourself To Live; the chapter where he compares every woman who’s ever been in his life to someone who has played with KISS is really amazing.
Saw him read in London a while back. He read and talked about that section. I could listen to him rambling for ages.
I was at the BU reading and while there were a lot of BU kids, I saw no gasping, nor note taking. I think he’s aware of the absurdity of some of the things said about him, and he does come across as much more down to earth than he does in his writing. He’s in a weird place if you think about it…he’s expected to have an opinion on everything, it’s expected to be well reasoned/clever, and everyone he meets thinks they are his friend. An unenviable position, but sure one of his own creation.
Re: Stereoblog,
Someone sent that link to me last night. It’s sort of misleading…
When I ran into him (this was like 2 years ago) I didn’t mention that I had a blog. We had previously just met through a mutual friend so I was just saying ‘hi, I met you the other night at so-and-so’s party.’ I had no desire to listen to Creedence with him.
I went to a reading of his at borders last summer shortly after “killing” came out. In front of the crowd of 100 or so, he openly bragged about not knowing who Elliot Smith was until he died. ‘Cause I mean c’mon really. Who knew who THAT guy was!
Not only is that a shame for him personally but that also (more importantly) makes him really shitty at his job!! If you are PAID to write articles for music magazines, how do you just matter of factly bypass an artist such as Smith? Don’t like him? That’s one thing. But never heard of him? It’s not exactly the latest 12″ on Load Records here…
He did the same thing in “killing” when he admitted that he knew very little about the replacements and going to Bob Stintson’s apt was anti-climactic. During his 30+ years of life, the last 10 assumably surrounded by any record he’d like, the man never thought to pick up a copy of “Let it Be” or “Pleased to Meet Me?” Too busy taking those shots at Coldplay. Hard hitting!
It makes my blood boil at how Klosterman gets away with wearing his musical ignorance like a badge of honor.
But fear not kids! I bet in a few monthes we’ll all have the pleasure of reading his witty convuluded musings about how the cast of Greys Anatomy reminds him of the rise and fall of ELO’s career.
Hack is the new talent!
down with klosterman!
up with stereoblog!
anyone want to read real literature? try “air guitar” by david hickey, a more interesting reflection on art, music, pop culture and life than anything klosterman has ever written.
You are all silly. Killing Yourself to Live was fantastic. Finally he took his sprawling kitschy shit and mixed it up with a plot. I personally think it was his best.
Just wanted to point out that, in Killing Yourself to Live, (which I thought was clever and good), Chuck repetedly states that journalism, especially music journalism, is esentially just having an oponion on your mail. In several of his other books he also puts down his own journalism work, and probably doesn’t take it as seriously as most people who commented seem to think.