/lit/ - Literature

>>13053420
Only from the side.

I’d knock the smug look right off her face and wrestle her to the ground.

>In a 1928 letter to a mutual friend of T.S. Eliot, Virginia Woolf wrote: "I have had a most shameful and distressing interview with dear Tom Eliot, who may be called dead to us all from this day forward. He has become an Anglo-Catholic believer in God and immortality, and goes to church. I was shocked. A corpse would seem to me more credible than he is. I mean, there’s something obscene in a living person sitting by the fire and believing in God."

>In a 1928 letter to a mutual friend of T.S. Eliot, Virginia Woolf wrote: "I have had a most shameful and distressing interview with dear Tom Eliot, who may be called dead to us all from this day forward. He has become an Anglo-Catholic believer in God and immortality, and goes to church. I was shocked. A corpse would seem to me more credible than he is. I mean, there’s something obscene in a living person sitting by the fire and believing in God."

Does anyone else hate Virginia Woolf with a burning passion? I’ve read a few of her works (Miss Dalloway, To the Lighthouse, Between the Acts, miscellaneous short stories) both for classes and, before these classes, some independently to see what the fuss was about concerning her being a great stylist and one of the greatest modernist writers.

She can hardly create interesting and compelling characters. Her works are snobbish, posh, dull, tedious, overly refined, and, honestly, just irritatingly fucking womanish. Her characters and plots are almost always the same thing over and over again: snobbish witty upper-class British dicks who think about how much they dislike the people around them or maybe are sometimes sexually attracted to them. Stupid cunts going around drinking tea, and, ooh! sometimes looking at a pretty bird or lake! Her books, despite typically being short (150-250 pages), are so fucking dull and rambling they make me want to shoot myself, and I say this as someone who’s enjoyed Faulkner and Joyce, who, even if they make the reader work to get through their books, at least are more rewarding and human. She has hardly any empathy for the wider human condition outside of her sheltered upper-class snobbish British life (yeah, yeah, OK, she got sexually abused as a kid, whatever), and honestly writes like a very arrogant childish schizoid with severe empathy defects, stupid female “compassion” (or, more properly, maternal instinct/finding something cute) for small animals and children aside.

I honestly don’t think she is worthy of being in the Western canon and will likely be forgotten in another 100 years if humanity is still around and recognizably cares about literature. I think the only reason she’s so overrated is because “muh female author”. Besides sometimes writing pretty sentences in a stream-of-consciousness style, she’s got nothing much going on for her. Between the Acts, in particular, was so bad that I can see why she killed herself after writing it. I would kill myself, too, if I wrote a novel that bad.

Look at this smug cunt’s face. You can see how much she just hates the lower classes.