[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 409 KB, 1600x1266, eter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16022170 No.16022170 [Reply] [Original]

In the 19th century we had Dostoevsky, Balzac, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Turgenev, Maupassant, Chekov, Zola, Dickens, Dumas, Goethe, Hugo, Lermontov, Melville, Keats, Proust, Stendhal. In music there was Beethoven, Wagner, Haydn, Mahler, Bizet, Brahms, Chopin, Schubert, Lizst, Mendelssohn, Berlioz, Bellini, Prokofiev, Puccini, Bruckner, Rossini. In the 21st century we have basically nothing. Any books that go over why this happened? No post modernists or people who are gonna try to tell me some retarded some shit some guy made on Ableton is equal to Beethoven please

>> No.16022200

21st century we had lil pump

>> No.16022204

>>16022170
Read Capitalist Realism. The 21st century can not, and will not allow those sorts of authors to flourish when profitability is the sole metric of success.

>> No.16022205

Anime.

>> No.16022232

>>16022170
This is all strikingly clear. Clear as day. One might find the lack of conversation about this fact very weird. People seem to treat pop music and television as the new "high culture" while art music, poetry, and the novel flounder. Maybe real art is starved of an audience. I think it has something to do with the advent televisual media, but I'm unaware of any thesis that handle this with the curiosity it deserves.

>> No.16022236

>>16022204
I've never read that book because I don't like those type of authors but saying "cause capitalism" to this question doesn't seem right to me because there are art forms that could be made with little to no resources yet they still aren't being made. If the argument is that the masses are brainwashed by the corporations to have shit taste that doesn't explain the intellectual class also having shit taste.

>> No.16022261

>>16022236
You’re not very bright

>> No.16022276

>>16022261
Not an argument

>> No.16022353

>>16022170
In the 21st century you will have me, once I am published, and I will be followed by one or two other literary figureheads until the world ends in a few decade's time.

>> No.16022358

Fundamentally, the world has become aestherialised; The reality in which common man now finds all his significant concentration of meaning - and is thereby attached to - is non-formal, it is ideal, it is autismal. Not 'worldly'

Because of the incredible saturation of imaginal novelty this internet-facilitated loop, of abstract, experiential generation immerses us in.. (manifest) Novelty is nothing new.

Novels, referring here to the conventional artistic-form, are an imaginal reflection posing as concrete representations, trying to be direct reflections of subjectively shared experience.

Due to this particular existential mode - post-modern living - which is co-dependently typical of a typical 4chan poster, (the qualities of which I just mentioned) there's no cultural attachments rooted in the 'real' (physical) world left to depict through a plot.

Any novel you wrote through a cosmos called narrative, would be entirely fractured and autismal, because of this it would be either entirely subjective and without personal reflection of any definable subject (the subject would seem schizo) or it would be very base, simple. Without potential

The internet is the abstract Jormungandr/Ouroboros which has encircled and yet suffocates the modern-mind (all our subjective world is constituted of desu)

When Eliot said that the Evening was aetherised on a table, he was referring to the nature of existence as experienced through the social subject, of an over-civilised, mechanical and dead, base pleasure seeking mode of conduct. Now the independent will is aetherised on the Sky: everyone starts getting uppity about changing the world and this is the ultimate submission to ignorance, in that we think (we think) of a social ideal, and begin invertedly to look at the world before our own life.

>> No.16022389

>>16022358
and to clarify on the last point: how that is a submission to ignorance, is that we've been so conditioned as to (even imagine, because it is not actually possible) to see the world through an abstract idea, rather than through our *own* eyes...

Of course that includes our intellect.

I call it heart.

We need to take heart, if any western youth, with a talent for writing can accomplish that, they've already wrote a novel, because they've found both basic sanity, and subtle vision again which are in reality one in the same!

>> No.16022400

America happened.

>> No.16022416

>>16022170
>No post modernists
You can't write anything relevant about 21st century life or culture without dipping into postmodernism in some way.
Imagine Dostoevsky trying to write a story about the average 4chan user. His style just wouldn't be up to the task.

>> No.16022474
File: 262 KB, 1275x1753, Decline.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16022474

The creative energy of the world has been exhausted. The only thing that remains is commercialized "art" and rehashes of previous, superior works.

>> No.16022650

>>16022170
Classics are classics only once they are in the past.
All these people talking about how drained and defeated the modern world are missing the point. If there exists struggle then humanity will create from it. Just because you are unaware of what, in the future, will be considered classic does not mean it does not exist.
If you want to find the old classics, you'll find a handful of books or thinkers from every era, a miniscule amount compared to what has been discarded.
You are inundated by the banal and the disposable, so you are unable to easily find what will be considered the classics in the future.

>> No.16022725

>>16022170
Not saying there hasn't been a cultural decline, but the century is also far from over.

>> No.16022757
File: 59 KB, 250x338, Shakyamuni-small250.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16022757

>>16022474
soon the beyuls will reveal themselves when the world has finally become too corrupt for spiritual practice

>> No.16022766

>>16022650
Where is all this hidden genius that people are unable to find? Are you suggesting there is the new Beethoven in the some village in Guatemala waiting for be discovered?

>> No.16022836

>>16022766
It's by definition hidden.
Why shouldn't a musical genius be in a village Guatemala?

>> No.16022874

>>16022836
There is no reason to suggest there is hidden genius anywhere. That's not it worked historically. Beethoven was not hidden and discovered at a later time.

>> No.16023011

>>16022276
yes, it's a fact

>> No.16023012

>>16022874
There was never a time Beethoven was not known to the general public? Was he born as a world famous musician?

>> No.16023021

>>16023012
Ah so you are suggesting the Beethoven is born but has not yet produced the work. I cant wait to hear it!!

>> No.16023025

>>16023012
No but Mozart was

>> No.16023032

>>16022170
In the 21st century we have you

>> No.16023035

>>16022170
we are only 20 years in

>> No.16023048

>>16022874
yeah, but Bach kind of was. He wasn't unknown when he lived, but not really considered a genius. So was Rembrandt. He was forgotten until romanticism. And basically people who are all "hurr durr who is the MichelAngelo of today" never appreciated Rubens fot example. Do you at least know any reasonably young contemporary composers? And what about people like Aphex Twin? Is he worthy of your attention? Do you even read musical notation?

>> No.16023050

>>16023021
any day now my friend

>> No.16023054

>>16023035
Are you optimistic lol

>> No.16023081

>>16022874
Extremely easy to say when the genius we recognized were realized well after their days thus being meshed together all the same from our perspective.

>> No.16023091

>>16023048
>Do you at least know any reasonably young contemporary composers?
Yeah but there is nothing innovative and great about them.

>Aphex Twin
He knows his stuff but I don't really find his work interesting or worthy of the greatness tag.

>Do you even read musical notation?
Yes

>> No.16023095

>>16023081
These composers and writers were not literally unknown by everyone as you are suggesting.

>> No.16023105

>>16023021
I'm not suggesting that they haven't produced any works, just that you and I aren't aware of them. If you'd like to find the next Beethoven, I suggest taking this guys
>>16023048
implicit suggestion and start listening to music and making an active study of it. Unfortunately, with all the creative works that are being produced now, and without the advantages of time winnowing away the bad and mediocre, finding the truly valuable may take some effort. I'm sure you're willing to spend the effort to find something valuable instead of going on to a taiwanese basket weaving forum to complain, right?

>> No.16023113

>>16023091
what does make Beethoven "great" then?

>> No.16023147

>>16023105
I do study music. I've listened to thousands of albums. I know in the in and outs of many genres. You are suggesting to me even though I know this all the music critics and I still don't know who the hidden Beethoven is lol. It's not fucking Aphex Twin.

>> No.16023158

>>16023113
>what does make Beethoven "great" then?

>> No.16023164

>>16023113
The Fifth, Moonlight Sonata, Für Elise

>> No.16023168

>>16022170
Xenakis is better than a majority of those composers. Also, no one consumes high art like that anymore because politically reproduced aristocracy isnt really a thing anymore (aristocratically produced politics is).

>> No.16023169

>>16023048
>And what about people like Aphex Twin? Is he worthy of your attention?
He should then immediately stop with all these post-African repetitions, and he should look for changing tempi and changing rhythms.

>> No.16023174

>>16023048
rubens is shit

>> No.16023175

>>16022650
Based hegelian poster

>> No.16023183

>>16023174
based. comparing him to Rembrandt ffs

>> No.16023195

>>16023174
you are an utter pleb repeating some opinion you saw someone else you think is smart say

>> No.16023196

>>16023147
There exist tens of thousands more albums. Your job is never done, o finder of the genius. I hope you've at least enjoyed listening to all that music, even if you haven't found the hidden Beethoven.

>> No.16023204

>>16023196
Music peaked with Ric Ocasek

>> No.16023256

>>16023174
t. poussiniste

>> No.16023274

>>16023147
theoryfags are the cancer of music

>> No.16023308
File: 1022 KB, 2537x3350, DP804222.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16023308

>>16023195
nope.

>> No.16023309

>>16023196
Yeah but others have listened to the thousands of others and they haven't found the hidden beethoven either. Your claim is meaningless. You know Russell's teapot and all that jazz.

>> No.16023384
File: 120 KB, 968x681, 1532341473864.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16023384

>>16023309
desu you add so little to the discussion that it already stopped making sense. You said that you're all knowledgable about contemporary music, who is a composer under 40 who is at least good in your opinion then? Maybe you can name even two? And again what makes Beethoven "great"? At this point it's just a couple of anons trying to convince a random anon, nothing to say about "genius" or "greatness".

>>16023164
I hope this is not your post because that's disappointing.

>> No.16023404

>>16023384
>And again what makes Beethoven "great"?
Read the OP. I said if you are a postmodernist don't post.

>> No.16023413

>>16023384
The Fifth, Moonlight Sonata, and Fur Elise are harmonically complex timeless works of art. You're not worth discussing or informing about music so take your disappointment back to reddi.t. Lil Wayne is a composer under 40 I would recommend to you. Shithead.

>> No.16023452
File: 211 KB, 1089x553, p306.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16023452

>>16022358
>>16022389

I truly appreciate this post anon. I've read it a couple times, contemplated it and I think I understand your point pretty well. I agree with it entirely. Perhaps someone should make a thread where we discuss this idea further?

Effortposts like this are one of my favorite things about /lit/. Thank you anon.

>> No.16023473

>>16023309
Yeah except I'm making the assumption that with billions of more people in existence, and millions upon millions more able to make music, and hundreds of years after him, there's likely someone rivalling Beethoven who exists.
The weight of statistical likelihood is on my side. Unless there's some identifiable factor as to why this massive increase in the production of music wouldn't also contain 'great' music, we must assume it is highly likely there are great musicians in this time period.

>> No.16023539

>>16023473
Beethoven being great is not only because of his brain. That was 50% of it. Beethoven in 2020 making rap music with the same brain does not make him just as good.

>> No.16023559

Whitearmor is 21st century Chopin

>> No.16023581

>>16022170
Civilization peaked in the 19th century. It's all downhill from there.

>> No.16023583

>>16022170
with all the distractions suddenly sitting for 12 hours and writing or composing music isn't so natural

>> No.16023611

>>16023473
>The weight of statistical likelihood is on my side.
why does learning what statistics are make people even dumber than they would normally be

>> No.16023752

>>16023539
Have some materials or ways of doing things that were essential to Beethoven being able to create his music been lost?
>>16023611
How am I wrong here?

>> No.16023764

>>16023752
>Have some materials or ways of doing things that were essential to Beethoven being able to create his music been lost?
yes

>> No.16023806

>>16023764
What, exactly?

>> No.16023961

>>16023806
Society has changed.

>> No.16023965

>>16023011
lol he fucking stumped you with a single statement. i think you might be the dim one

>> No.16023974

Yes, but now we have indoor plumbing and women have a pretty good chance of not dying during childbirth.
The worlds moved on. They wouldnt get printed if it wouldnt sell. Same as then, same as now.

>> No.16023995

>>16023974
what a lame fucking response. "We have other amenities" as if we can't have those and great literature at the same time. Not to say that OP is making a good point either, but this post reeks of "end of history" naivety.

>> No.16024221

>>16023764
artists in general received more support back then.

>> No.16025012

another veiled "no more mozart because no more based traditional western values!" discussed by a board that couldnt sustain a discussion on more than 2 contemporary writers or composers

>> No.16025086

>>16025012
not an argument

>> No.16025164

>>16022170
And basically all of those writers and composers were all born in wealthy or even aristocratic families, which means that you could only become a great writer if you were part of those uppet class circles. Whereas now, when the absolute amount of people who could become great writers is 100000000x the amount it was in the 19th century, and yet we have no great works

>> No.16025196

>>16022170
How many of those authors were recognized in their time as being capable of lasted multiple centuries?
It's difficult to judge the state of things at a particular time when you're in the middle of them.

>> No.16025241

Okay, here's two reasons.

- Back then there was no copyright. Some book was interesting? Great. Publishers would get a copy, pay some translators and publish it without paying any royalties or shit. No legal bullshit involved = greater diffusion of writers (the >translations meme wasn't as strong back then btw).

- The second reason has to do with the (unfortunate) cultural shift and predominance of America. Back then, the cultural epicenters were Paris, London, America. From a business PoV, now it's mostly just America. Americans hardly read translations so they prefer their own shit. A book is a hit if it sells well there. The biggest companies in the world have stakes in most of the publishers in other countries, so instead of receiving shit from their subsidiaries, it's more effective to push American bullshit down everyone's throats (fantasy, scifi, detective crap). Their merchandise is more appetizing for the plebes for all the other media they ship out to the world (tv shows, films, videogames, etc) as well. In other words, Americans can sell the whole package, and if the last 80 years have proven anything, is that Americans are mostly terrible writers no matter the "Bestseller" labels and shit they use as marketing.

>> No.16025259

Beethoven would be shitting blood if he worked out that he could make moving and fulfilling music with a couple of instruments in a garage without the horseshit metaphysics trying to pass off music as an art through the pointless busywork of complication

>> No.16025637

>>16022236
those art forms take time to produce and if you want to produce something of substantial quality it takes LOTS of time. and time is money my friend

>> No.16025683

>>16022236
all authors and musicians you mentioned were paid a lot of money for their work

>> No.16025686

If your definition of good art is "old art", then of course old art will be better by definition.

>> No.16025687

>>16022358
peak psued

>> No.16025699

>>16022170
I think the answer is pretty obvious: the decline of the aristrocratic class. You can't have mass access/democratization of art and expect the best artists to rise to the top. Instead of idealizing the past start to accept the present state of affairs and make the most of it. There are still many good composers, not sure about authors though.

>> No.16025703

>>16023035
what have we had in the past 50 years? culture won't magically appear out of nothing

>> No.16025706

>>16023413
>>16023404
based

>> No.16025710
File: 285 KB, 491x491, 1596207410411.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16025710

>>16025012

>> No.16025808

Every semi-decent modern piece of art is better than old ones.

>> No.16025829

>>16025808
philistines not welcomed itt

>> No.16025834

We are only 20% through the 21st century. Birtwistle, Saariaho, Kurtag, Dean, Reich, ect are just about alive. From my country George Benjamin, Peter Maxwell-Davies, and Julian Anderson are still active.

All the above composers are old, and in many ways are 20th century composers. Haydn died in 1809 but you are claiming him for the 19th century? The height of 19th century romanticism wasn't reached until decades after Haydn's death. Similarly, this century is still stamped with the culture of the late 20th century. We can only know the character of 21st century genius when the people born after 2000 become old enough to compose mature work, which will be around the 40s-60s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GF_YwC3Yjbw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7h4XVaMOHo

>> No.16025842

>>16025829
If something is bad physically, that does not mean it is good spiritually.

>> No.16027351

it's because you're too retarded to figure out how to find things to read

>> No.16027391

>>16025834
davies died a few years ago