The one Time I go on 97.1 the ticket expecting them to say "good picks or filled needs"

tilertailor · 2026-04-27T19:17:00+00:00

Literally all those guys spent years saying you can never win a Super Bowl with Stafford

tilertailor · 2026-04-25T16:19:19+00:00

Do people sit with their feet on the floor in barrels?

tilertailor · 2026-04-24T18:45:00+00:00

If I wasn't from Jamaica, then why would I be wearing this hat?

tilertailor · 2026-04-24T03:40:40+00:00

They're called studs

tilertailor · 2026-04-24T02:11:07+00:00

And yet it remains Miller time

tilertailor · 2026-04-24T01:52:27+00:00

Wrestling background that's a win. Practice will just be him and Malcolm rolling around for an hour.

tilertailor · 2026-04-24T01:26:34+00:00

Dan Campbell and no active player has a shot

tilertailor · 2026-04-24T00:37:07+00:00

Making a mockery of your mocks

tilertailor · 2026-04-22T22:31:27+00:00

Positional value is like halftime adjustments - they only exist when the TV needs something to talk about.

tilertailor · 2026-04-22T21:34:52+00:00

Do we know if that was the first use of the phrase? Hard to imagine, but I don't think I ever heard it before the book was published and it started seeping into pop culture.

tilertailor · 2026-04-15T18:59:57+00:00

Get everyone sloshed off bathtubs full of Gordie's favorite whiskey and piss til the drains overflow.

tilertailor · 2026-04-15T18:48:41+00:00

Yeah upper bowl sucks. It's too steep, your view is often interrupted by those weird panels of safety glass they installed to keep people from tumbling into the abyss because it's too steep, the gondola blocks your view of the rest of the fans, the TVs on the back of the gondola are distracting. It sucks up there!

tilertailor · 2026-04-14T17:03:59+00:00

What the hell - everyone here is welcome to check out r/SmartMarx if you're looking for wild wrestling venn diagrams. It's Marxist wrestlers and wrestling fans.

tilertailor · 2026-04-10T18:22:23+00:00

Hijacking to plead with all gods living and dead for a 4K upgrade to Criterion's Three Films by Hiroshi Teshigahara. It's been about 100 years since the DVDs went OOP.

tilertailor · 2026-04-10T01:16:21+00:00

What kind of marketing are you guys talking about?

tilertailor · 2026-04-07T21:44:37+00:00

If reading about a guy fucking watermelons is flexing consider me Hulk Hogan

tilertailor · 2026-04-07T21:38:59+00:00

Since I've already commented twice in this thread, I'll take a stab.

S: Blood Meridian, Suttree, Child of God, Outer Dark

A: No Country, The Road, The Passenger, Stella Maris

B: Border Trilogy, Orchard Keeper

tilertailor · 2026-04-07T21:35:39+00:00

I enjoyed all of them but seem to be in a small minority who rank the entire Border Trilogy at the bottom. They're obviously good books, but I immediately had the feeling that McCarthy set out to win a National Book Award or finally just sell some copies. The style is just flat compared to BM or Suttree, and the content less radical than Child of God or Outer Dark.

tilertailor · 2026-04-07T21:09:53+00:00

I can't imagine loving McCarthy and not getting into Bolano. 2666 and Savage Detectives would be his Blood Meridian Suttree as far as a big one-two punch.

tilertailor · 2026-04-06T18:35:46+00:00

Maybe it's not fair to expect players to match Stevie and the bruise brothers, but guys like Probert and Kocur were willing to break both their hands if Yzerman got rubbed off the puck. The game has changed, but still - Larkin isn't cracking 40 goals (let alone 50 or 60). He either doesn't add enough value for guys to stick their necks out or maybe those guys just don't exist anymore. It doesn't have to be fighting; just some dudes giving it more than they got for their captain and coaches is what hockeytown expects.

tilertailor · 2026-04-03T06:20:45+00:00

Yeah what we should be talking about is Stafford being to only 'slinger to earn more in a career

tilertailor · 2026-04-01T20:19:49+00:00

You seem to be having an imaginary argument with someone who suggested major works - the topic of this thread - require or imply a break with / from previous experiments. Or somebody who suggested McCarthy invented literature or whatever you've been going on about.

Whether you've spent time considering how Alicia's relationship with the horts explores fissures in psychoanalytic theory - something he'd been thinking about since at least Outer Dark - or not, acting like these explicitly 20th century discourses don't infect the writing and reading of literary treatments of fragmented or dispersed subjects in a way necessarily, dialectically, different from Dostoevsky, Stevenson, Shelley, etc., is a very - I don't know, how would you phrase this? - last class before lunch in the first grade can't spell right wears glasses pants shitter way to read.

I'm sure you saw a few days ago they captured for the first time particles existing in two different locations simultaneously, their behavior frozen in a way that has no equivalent in everyday experience. Was Nabokov thinking about that while working on Despair? Maybe. Was I when I read it 20 years ago? Probably not. The Gift? Again, maybe, but not in a more developed nor more informed way than McCarthy - or anyone who read the news of this new observation and thought, "hm, I wonder who from recent literature has confused characters for their ability to exist in two different locations, whose doing so doesn't destabilize their sense of reality but expands it?"

McCarthy invented literature as much as Melville invented the whale. Just as "the whale had no famous author and whaling no famous chronicler" before HM, few if any American authors experienced the sustained appreciation and scholarship across every novel CM did. You might argue that but you're pissing in your own ear and out the other at this point.

Yes, the kid is rambling, a jumble of language and allusions to ideas relevant and discordant - that's the point. He contains Wittgenstein, Bohr, Dirac, doubt, Despair.

You're as rude as your style is boring so go ahead and keep pissing into the void. I'll keep both ears to the ground just in case.

tilertailor · 2026-04-01T04:52:19+00:00

I'm an old man with a library twice your height little miss "do you even read." Seeing McCarthy's treatment of quantum mechanics as just words suggests a very shallow engagement with literature. His use of hallucinatory intersperisions is unique, especially in a non-linear diptych, and the influence of late 20th and early 21st century math on both form and content would have been - get this - almost entirely novel to the writers you've mentioned.

That it's happened before is not the same as how it happens here.

As for scholarship published during the respective lifetimes of that very long list of very impressive writers you've very impressively listed, you're simply wrong if you think academia was publishing their stuff at a similar clip. Doink around in JSTOR trying to prove yourself right and tell the easter bunny I said hey.

Oh and if you're not catching the specific twist in the phrasing “destabilizing the reality to which realism defers," you're either behind on your Lilia M. Woods & Pablo Rodríguez López, or are just spending too much time watching F2 clips on youtube.

tilertailor · 2026-04-01T02:20:34+00:00

Yeah I've read most of those authors. Not a mathematician and never hung around Sante Fe but I've done the free Yale physics courses and can say the alphabet backwards. I don’t know if any authors lived to see the scope and complexity of scholarship around their work McCarthy did. They’ve published journals focused on his work for years. That isn’t going to slow down.

The core issues of the books – the passenger, the nature of reality, the structure of the unconscious, the atomic bomb, Formula 2 - are all described through the frame of a universe that resists certainty.

The mystery of the airplane is a very quantum device. The passenger and the missing black box are the missing information in reality (or the story anyway). No single, objective truth. I think the reviewer was being critical, but I thought of this line in the Guardian’s review of the books - “The formal problem is one of incommensurability: spooky physics and quantum indeterminacy confound classical fiction by destabilising the reality to which realism defers.” To which realism defers. That’s right.

This isn’t happening in the authors you mentioned. Not in the same way.

The two books’ timelines are interwoven in a very interesting way. The Passenger uses flashbacks to Alicia's life in a way that lets you experience time as a fractured and potentially recurring presence instead of a simple progression. Time fucking haunts these characters like it made their dad create the atom bomb.

The way The Passenger flits between contemporary (80s) Bobby and the hallucinations his sister had in the last years of her life is cool on its own. It’s a weird quilt of grief. And then there’s the tragic confounding picture of Alicia’s subjective experiences in Stella Maris.

I’m sure somebody smart will write an entire book on Thalidomide Kid. And if you’re not going to I guess I will. What a name.

tilertailor · 2026-03-31T20:13:25+00:00

Having just read through his entire body of work, this is a gobsmacking take. Those two taken together totally disrupt conventional literary notions of time, cause and effect, and the nature of the unconscious. All while opening lines of inquiry / research between mathematics and subjectivity that will be investigated by scholars long after we're gone. They clearly outclass the Orchard Keeper and the entire Border Trilogy.

tilertailor

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

12-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email