/lit/ - Literature

Holy shit every sample I've skimmed in this thread is truly and astonishingly bad. You people hadn't any talent. Here I was mourning the faults in my own writing when there's heaps of holocaustic crap spanning across god knows how many generals. Thanks /lit/ you've encouraged me to keep going that I might sooner you leave behind.

>>22479305
>These are the books people mean here when they say “start with the Greeks.” Volumes 4 to 11 in the Great Books series.
>the Greek Books series
lmao@yourlife

why the fuck is the Iliad only like 20 pages here? Is this some kind of sparknotes regurgitation of the FOUNDATIONAL texts of human civilization?

>>22199872
I genuinely can't believe this is one of the foremost "intellectuals" of our time.

>If multiculturalism meant Cervantes then who could protest? But of course multiculturalism doesn't mean Cervantes
Was Bloom retarded? "Multiculturalism" means reading books and authors from outside of the Western secular liberal milieu. Cervantes is the epitome of it, he's not "multicultural" by virtue of having a darker skin than A*glos. If your understanding of multiculturalism is to read French, German and Spanish authors alongside A*glo authors then you don't really understand multiculturalism. Russian anti-Occidentalist literature would've been a better bet.

>>17647267
Most teenagers are stupid and opportunistic, that anon will grow up and repent his ways once he's wiser. It profits nothing to put a mirror before a retard.

>>17349922
Yours is bad - neoromantic claptrap - but I just checked hers and it's even worse. It is, indeed, not poetry at all, but merely a collection of contemporary sociopolitical clichés. The fact that this is considered poetry in the Anglo world shows how completely alienated from serious aesthetic understanding the cultural standard-bearers of the Anglo plutocracy are.

For other non-Anglos like me who hadn't seen the poem yet, just look at it:

"When day comes we ask ourselves,
where can we find light in this never-ending shade?
The loss we carry,
a sea we must wade
We've braved the belly of the beast
We've learned that quiet isn't always peace
And the norms and notions
of what just is
Isn't always just-ice
And yet the dawn is ours
before we knew it
Somehow we do it
Somehow we've weathered and witnessed
a nation that isn't broken
but simply unfinished
We the successors of a country and a time
Where a skinny Black girl
descended from slaves and raised by a single mother
can dream of becoming president
only to find herself reciting for one"

And so on.

>>16550364
>To pick, choose or reject is at the very essence of modernity.
You think OP was free to make this thread? To feel as he feels, othered and incongruous? The fact of the matter is he's already rejected modernity in the most important way.

Baldwin is just another Toni Morrison. That is to say, another black intellectual created so that blacks may have intellectuals. They are born from committees and mob pressure rather than merit or organic success. I use Morrison as an example because she's so flagrant, doesn't win a nobel prize, queue protests and academic indignation riding on the wave of hippy dippy degeneracy, voila, she's a nobel laureate. None of them have discernible talent of course, which is a shame as they supplant the opportunity for anyone else more worthy of the spot.

OP is just another political stooge. How they can even suggest Baldwin is intelligent is beyond me, since it cannot be discovered as either true or false. I distinctly remember the debate he had against William Buckley, the king of midwits and conservative mediocrity. Maybe Baldwin is a genius, but he was totally unable to recognize let alone response to Buckley's feeble logic. There was no argumentation involved, just the typical ooga booga sentimental appeals that make up the totality of popular black 'intellectual' thought. The average high-school graduate could have done a better job of addressing the argument presented, but of course the applause then echoes even now, from the hands and mouths of stooges who consider themselves some kind of rebel despite their entire ideology being sold to them and similarly bought by all popular edifices and establishments possible. Is there a James Baldwin brand of Nikes? It wouldn't surprise me.

This thread makes me feel better about my own writing. All of you are such tragic mediocrities, hahaha.

>>15346845
>What did you think? /lit/ is about retards who think they're smart because they read classics. It's all a joke.
Do you realize you're on a literature board?

>>14219121
Completely inundated by bourgeois mediocrity, somewhere in the past few years there's been a total capture by reddit faggots.

>>13104340
>claims The Iliad is a work for pseudo intellectuals because it accessible
>clearly didn't understand it on even the most basic levels
>justifies his unimpressive tirade with pop-history truisms
embarrassing

>>13030799
So I made a post making fun of LaVey and you somehow took it I'm a Satanist? What?

>>12401246
>You’re exaggerating my argument. All I said was that an extinct or unknown religion is irrelevant. So what if the true religion isn’t known to us, because it will appear in the future? How could we possibly know that and choose it? Let’s work with what we have NOW, what we have knowledge of.
Jesus.

What are the essential Shakespeares? I haven't even read Hamet, and I am ashamed, despite my pretensions of being well read. I don't want to be like this guy https://youtu.be/85TE0K5fgJM, help. Where do I begin, and where should I end?

>>11942444
>lauded by countless intellectuals and credited with bringing Dostoyevski to the west
>long before it ever entered the public domain

>>11080204
Let's assume this is true for arguments sake, it then begs the question why? We then have to ask, are blacks, and women, and the like, and all their many insipid works in fact victims of this era of mediocrity because they couldn't reasonably be published before -- or is this era of literature mediocre precisely because blacks and women and the like are now represented and even prevalent among the readership and published writers of the day?

>>10979228
>emulating barbarians mutilating themselves in honor of the god they think lives in the trees and clouds

Do you have any poems memorized? Do you think its worth teaching poetry by rote anymore? I didn't used to but this video has me wondering...

https://youtu.be/BHoAQW_DBI4?t=2m35s
skip to 2.5 mins
Bloom would approve I think.

>>10661668
>Mate, first of all, it's impossible to take a stance on literally anything without being political.

>"Elf-besotted fans aside, why shouldn't Tolkien be granted admission to the literary pantheon? Well, for one thing, his detractors argue, his prose is unbearably archaic. >"Sometimes, reading Tolkien, I am reminded of the Book of Mormon," writes Bloom. Tolkien's verse--which litters the text of The Lord of the Rings--is generally accepted to be even worse."
You guys told me Harold Bloom was the good guy. He spoke of the evils of Harry Potter and I aligned myself with him.

It turns out he doesn't like the Lord of the Rings though? What in the hell could he have possibly meant by this?

>>9926238
Do your own coursework.

>>9894831

>Hapa
>very right wing, but not in the /pol/ sense, as /pol/ is actually just racist leftism which idiots mistakenly call right
I'm not even going to ask. It's not worth it.

>>9867924
>Now popular because Trump (lol).
Are you retarded? Orwell hated liberals. He literally would have voted for Trump if he were alive and American today.