What a great piece! I read to the end, I was so gripped. Thanks for this. You touch on an interesting question which is...why have writers been so much more successful (creatively) at imitating Sebald than at imitating Bernhard? Like Sebald's influence just seems a lot more fruitful and has produced a lot more literary reputations (and much better novels) than Bernhard's influence has.
I think basically you're right that Bernhard is _too_ easy to imitate, so it leaves you a bit trapped, unable to truly improve.
My sense is that compared to Bernhard, Sebald dwells on themes, and operates in an emotional register, that are both more creatively fruitful in themselves and more likely to be treated as Serious by literary authorities. The weight of history is more compelling than personal grievance (granted, Bernhard does both, but he's ultimately more occupied by grousing); melancholy is more seductive than anger. And then I think there's also the fact that Sebald's prose is just plain better—more artful and sophisticated, and therefore (to your point) harder to replicate, and less likely to be reduced to pastiche.
I think it's telling that when writers imitate Sebald, they're mainly trying to recreate a mood or an atmosphere, which is only partly a matter of prose. But this mood can also be abused; I really liked this thoughtful take on the subject by Jon Repetti: https://fivegoodhours.substack.com/p/against-sebaldian-melancholy
The only full-on prose+mood Sebald imitation I've read, with the photos and everything, is Panorama by Dušan Šarotar, which just did not work for me, though I respect the effort.
What a great piece! I read to the end, I was so gripped. Thanks for this. You touch on an interesting question which is...why have writers been so much more successful (creatively) at imitating Sebald than at imitating Bernhard? Like Sebald's influence just seems a lot more fruitful and has produced a lot more literary reputations (and much better novels) than Bernhard's influence has.
I think basically you're right that Bernhard is _too_ easy to imitate, so it leaves you a bit trapped, unable to truly improve.
Thank you so much for reading!
My sense is that compared to Bernhard, Sebald dwells on themes, and operates in an emotional register, that are both more creatively fruitful in themselves and more likely to be treated as Serious by literary authorities. The weight of history is more compelling than personal grievance (granted, Bernhard does both, but he's ultimately more occupied by grousing); melancholy is more seductive than anger. And then I think there's also the fact that Sebald's prose is just plain better—more artful and sophisticated, and therefore (to your point) harder to replicate, and less likely to be reduced to pastiche.
I think it's telling that when writers imitate Sebald, they're mainly trying to recreate a mood or an atmosphere, which is only partly a matter of prose. But this mood can also be abused; I really liked this thoughtful take on the subject by Jon Repetti: https://fivegoodhours.substack.com/p/against-sebaldian-melancholy
The only full-on prose+mood Sebald imitation I've read, with the photos and everything, is Panorama by Dušan Šarotar, which just did not work for me, though I respect the effort.