/lit/ - Literature

>>16185008
Anon, what's your point? They're not obscure enough for you? I would contest that they're widely read in the first place, because people don't fucking read. If people have read these poets, they were likely forced to do so in a class, not of their own volition. And they're good poets, and difficult as well. They're worth a read. Almost no one on /lit/ seems to have read them. There is nothing wrong with enjoying the classics of English literature and thinking other people should read them too. But go ahead, go read obscure NYRB translations that literally no one cares about, you hipster of the soul.
>>16185110
What are you talking about? I like to post images because this is a fucking IMAGE BOARD. Go back to fucking R*ddit if you don't like images.