/lit/ - Literature

this happens to anyone who requires a public audience for support. The relation denegrates integrity for more superfluous values. Cliff is a debased knave.

>>11450647
This is why Aristocracy is the best societal model. Plato was right.

>Chuck Palahniuk

What's his best and worst review?

>>11450657
pleb, aristocracy, monarchy, and republic are equally good when society isn't corrupted.

>>11450680
watch maps of meaning review along with his JBP interview for max cringe. i bet hes taken it down by now

>>11450478
Yes, and the books tend to be very randomize from garbage like fight club to kino like lolita.

>>11450478
>Siddhartha
>patrician

>>11450845
>Siddhartha - Hermann Hesse BOOK REVIEW
>1 day ago

>>11450812
> to kino like lolita

kys

>>11451295
kys

>>11450845
Fight Club is the patrician example

>>11450798
im watching now and i hate peterson but why is this cringe

>>11451115
>>11451320
I don't deserve to be here.

>>11450478
>Fight Club
>Patrician

>>11450711
Wrong

>>11450478
paperbird is a pretty good booktuber. Also, check out bookchemist

>best book guy, bazpierce, is done (for now)
feelsBAD
I'm straight as hell but I like seeing him/hearing his sass

>>11450478
maybe he's just doing whatever he wnts

>>11450478
>siddartha
>patrician

>>11450478
>1 day ago
>7 months ago

This is 100%/100% tasty bait.

>>11450711
yes but which mode is least corruptible

>>11453272
this good work OP

Siddhartha is good though...

I like this dude, does anyone know any other reviewers like him (preferably male)?

>>11450680
worst I've seen was his 'review' of The Recognitions, mostly a drunken ramble about the size and weight of the Dalkey paperback

>>11453780
bookchemist

>>11450812
Oh boy here we go

>>11451320
>>>/r/eddit

He's actually gotten better. Watch his early reviews and compare them to his recent ones

>>11451625
Yup, PaperBird is the best booktuber I've found.

>>11453257
Read the post again, carefully

>>11450845
>>11451536
>>11453257
uhmm

>>11454151
>>11454154
The notion that anyone would find Fight Club to be patrician is too outrageous to accept

>>11450478
>youtube
found your problem OP

>>11454151
>>11451320
based

>>11450478
It's what becoming a Jordan Peterson fan does to you.

I actually like him personally, but he's just not very smart.

>>11453804
Did he even read it? He couldn't talk about anything that you're not able to find on Wikipedia, and whenever he said something of worth he didn't go into detail just glossed over it and continue by talking about how big it is.

As for the man himself he seems like the typical self-absorbed depressed man that always push for intellectual integrity instead of understanding. He's also horrible for only appreciate the themes of death and sex.

>Fight Club
He's merely adjusting his reading material to his readerly capabalities.

>>11454143
I honestly prefer his earlier stuff, pre-Peterson. Now he only talks about masculinity, Jung, and the oppression of liberals. I hate the pause&smirk he does after giving a heavy-handed explanation of the central plot point (often the death of a character), and how he continues by taking a sip of wine and then gives a few words on how macabre it is. Ugh.

>>11453295
Neither. It is cyclical with with Monarchs arising out of the barbarism that democracy eventually creates before repeating the descent.

>>11454292
>I hate the pause&smirk he does after giving a heavy-handed explanation
I agree but women eat that shit up, he has a very attractive (yet obviously superficial) way of expressing himself, I wish I could talk like that

He's so bad he makes fantano look good

>>11454460
Example of this? Sounds weird af

>>11453295

>>11454477
Check his Doktor Glas review.

>>11453295
Discourses on Livy book 3 chapter 9

HOW ONE MUST CHANGE WITH THE TIMES, IF HE WANTS TO HAVE GOOD FORTUNE ALWAYS

I have many times considered that the causes of the good and bad fortunes of men depend on the manner of their proceeding with the times. For it is seen that some men in their actions proceed with drive, others with consideration and caution. And as in the one and the other of these suitable limits are exceeded, not being able to observe the true course in either, errors are made: but he who comes to err less and have good fortune, is he who suits the times ((as I have said)) with his methods, and always proceeds according to the impulses of his nature. Everybody knows that Fabius Maximus proceeded with his army with consideration and caution, far removed from all impetuosity and all Roman audacity, and his good fortune was that his method well suited the times. For Hannibal having come into Italy a young man and with his fortunes fresh, and having already twice overcome the Roman People, and that Republic being almost deprived of her good troops and discouraged, could not have experienced better fortune than to have a Captain who, with his slowness and caution, had kept the enemy at bay. Nor could Fabius also have found times more suitable to his methods, from which his glory resulted.

>>11455670
And that Fabius had done this from his nature, and not by choice, is seen when Scipio wanting to pass into Africa with those armies to put an end to the war, Fabius contradicted this so greatly, as one who could not break away from his methods and his customs. So that, if he had been (master), Hannibal would still be in Italy, as he (Fabius) could not see that the times had changed. But being born in a Republic where Citizens and dispositions were different, as was Fabius, who was excellent in the times needed to protract the war, and as was Scipio in the times suited to win it. From this it happens that a Republic has a greater vitality and a longer good fortune than a Principality, for it can accommodate itself better to the differences of the times, because of the diversity of its Citizens, than can a Principality. For a man who is accustomed to proceed in one manner, will never change, as has been said, and it happens of necessity that, when times change in a way not in accordance with his manner, he is ruined.

>>11455677
Piero Soderini, mentioned previously several times, proceeded in all his affairs with patience and humanity. He and his country prospered while the times were in conformity with his manner of proceeding: but afterwards when the times came when it was necessary to break that patience and humility, he did not know how to do it; so that, together with his country, he was ruined. Pope Julius II proceeded during all the time of his Pontificate with impetuosity and with fury, and because the times well accorded with him, all his enterprises turned out successfully for him. But if other times had existed requiring other counsel, of necessity he would have been ruined, for he would not have changed his manner nor his conduct.

>>11455683
And there are two reasons that we cannot thus change; The one, that we cannot resist that to which nature inclines us: The other, that having prospered greatly by one method of procedure, it is not possible to persuade them they can do well to proceed otherwise: whence it happens that fortune varies in a man, as it varies with the times, but he does not change his methods. The ruin of Cities also happens from the institutions of the Republic not changing with the times, as we discussed at length above. But they (changes) arrive later (in a Republic) because they suffer more in changing, for times will come when the whole Republic will be unsettled, so that the changing in method of procedure by one man will not suffice.

And as we have made mention of Fabius Maximus, who held Hannibal at bay, it appears to me proper to discuss in the following chapter, how a Captain ((wanting in any way to come to an engagement with the enemy)) can be impeded by the (enemy) from doing so.

>>11450478
literally who?

>>11455690
sempai what exactly are you trying to show with these quotes?

If you're trying to illustrate Machiavelli's equation of prudence and virtue (virtu), then wouldn't this quote from the end of The Prince work much better?

>I conclude, thus, that when fortune varies and men
remain obstinate in their modes, men are happy while they
are in accord, and as they come into discord, unhappy. I
judge this indeed, that it is better to be impetuous than
cautious, because fortune is a woman; and it is necessary, if
one wants to hold her down, to beat her and strike her
down. And one sees that she lets herself be won more by the
impetuous than by those who proceed coldly. And so always,
like a woman, she is the friend of the young, because
they are less cautious, more ferocious, and command her
with more audacity.

>>11455726
Better Than Food: Book Reviews. One of the few straight male book reviewers on youtube.

>>11453321
>>11454143
>>11454159
>>11454272
>>11450676
>>11450812

His review of Conspiracy Against the Human Race gave me quite a few laughs. I really like his delivery desu

>>11453814
hieveryone, heleisthe bOOkemis once egen

>>11450478
both picks in pic are normie tier desu

>>11456129
not normie != patrician

>>11450478
A good reviewer will make every book review interesting.

>>11455778
>If you're trying to illustrate Machiavelli's equation of prudence and virtue (virtu)
I'm just pointing why a republic is least corruptible even if >>11450711
Also, when time comes a republic can put the right man in the right place without the envy of the prince.

And again, virtue isn't hereditary

Rade volte risurge per li rami
l'umana probitate; e questo vole
quei che la dà, perché da lui si chiami.

His reviews are usually shallow but they give me a good idea of what the book will be like and his taste is decent, so I find him useful for getting literature recs as most of my own interests are nonfiction. His personality is fine too, he sometimes has interesting things to say but can be a little pretentious, but that's to be expected from someone reviewing books online.

>>11456134
Where did I imply that

>>11456250
I agree with you

Your post just made me wish I was better educated in the classics though :(

>tfw parents only pushed me to "practical" subjects for the first 18 years of my life

>>11450478
Does this fucker actually make a living doing this?

>>11456748
idk he removed the feature of letting people see exactly how much you make each video but last time i remember it was >$500.

he reviewed 33 books last year. 33 * 500 = 16,500

>>11450478
I liked this one from the new ones

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH53vje0SEU

>>11454474
you wish, Anthony.

>>11456311
this

>>11450657
Yeah if you’re a faggot
Aristocracy is based off of hereditary connections rather than actual skill. The “elite” can be just as incompetent as a NEET on welfare if he/she has been coddled all their life. If you accepted based off of skill and not because your dad is rich then it would function.

His Houellebecq and Mishima reviews were good. Thought for sure this guy browsed /lit/. These new videos are probably just aimed at normies. Wouldn't be surprised if he did like 1984 or some shit next.

>>11458652
Skills can be taught. An aristocracy ensures that ample resources are poured into educating a few from a young age towards a particular purpose.
If you can get past the degenerating nature of excessive wealth to a youth then it's a pretty good system.

>>11459161
It doesn’t matter if you have the way, if there’s no will then the kid is never going to learn.

>>11459161
>Skills can be taught.
skills are worthless without virtue, and virtue can't be taught or at the very least nobody knows ho to teach it as argued in plato's meno where various famously great athenians with horrible children are invoked. "how to reliably make your own child not grow up to be human garbage" remains an unsolved problem that undermines any system based on heredity.

>>11459204
Very good points. I would, however, like to add that our contemporary meritocracies leave a lot to be desired in the type of people it elevates to positions of power. I believe this is a problem inherent in meritocracies and thus it cannot be solved by the alteration of the system, only its abandonment.

Give me three reasons why you think that Siddharta by Hermann Hesse is not quality literature.

You absolute retards, all you do is thinking you're smart by playing the contrarian. I fucking hate this board. Fuck all of you.

>inb4 you're mad
Yes I am.

>>11458664
He is a normie though

>>11460151
>being mad on a board where everyone is being ironic 90% of the time

>>11450478
What sort of fag doesn't like Fight Club?