/lit/ - Literature

>>12784334
NIPPLES NIPPLES NIPPLES NIPPLES NIPPLES

>>12784474
The nipples ruin the image. I can't imagine her as a Christian peasant girl if she's showing her nipples like a common whore. She is nothing but a Jezebel to me.

Tuchman, The March of Folly
Perlstein, Nixonland

>>12784479
what do you think 'common' means?

>>12784572
>common
>ADJECTIVE
>British: Showing a lack of taste and refinement supposedly typical of the lower classes; vulgar.

>>12784479
>iron plates are the only thing befitting a beautiful young woman
>and definitely not plaits!!!

>>12784577
e.g. of the peasantry

>>12784581
1. Not all peasants are whores; I specified a "common whore", not just a "common person".
2. I think you mean "i.e."

>>12784590
i know what i'm about, thank you. exempli gratia; for example. the peasantry being an example of a 'common' group.
no, not all peasants are whores, though all peasants are 'common'. in attempting to draw a distinction between a peasant and a 'common' whore, by 'common' you are semantically linking the two.
in elizabethan/jacobin poetry and drama this is a common word play, where the peasantry are associated with wantonness.

>>12784334
No, because you'd only become well versed in the views expressed in the book. To learn a subject and be well rounded you must read different views on it. Different authors will have conflicting views, or even just emphasize certain things.

I think the best way to learn is to pick a subject and immerse yourself in it. The Golden One AKA The Glorious Lion of Mother EVROPA has a concept of "the culture stack". Basically, he picks a time period, let's say the classical world, and will then read books and play video games in that period. To learn about that time period you would do the same. So pick up a bunch of history books on the Greek world for instance, and read them over the summer. Also watch films in that period, and play games etc the books would also be a mix of history and historical fiction. Watch documentaries on it, and visit museums to see artifacts from then.

Rather than a book on this topic, then a book on another topic.

>>12784617
jacobin? jacobean.

>>12784617
>though all peasants are 'common'
>MECHANISED STATUS MAN GOOD!
Imagine believing this...

>>12784590
>>12784617
further, 'common whore' is a redundancy, as whores are already 'for public use', i.e. 'common'.

>>12784645
i didn't invent the class system nor the vocabulary we use to distinguish between the classes nor the connotations that have agglomerated around those words over centuries

>>12784617
Okay, bud. If you meant e.g., you're stupid, because giving an example of a common person is simply beside the point.
I said she's dressed like a common whore; if I m had just said, "like a whore", I could have been referring to a high class whore, who wouldn't be showing her nipples in public.

>>12784634
But if you find the right book it may be more valuable than ten or a hundred other books. And meditating on that book properly will give you much better results than larping as Johnny 5. It's why people used to copy over the Bible word for word.
https://youtu.be/Pj-qBUWOYfE
>listening to someone who calls himself The Golden One
SAD!

>>12784666
But Satan did.

>>12784669
I agree with your post and I'm too lazy to go into the thread to quote the person you're arguing with to tell them to sod off.

>>12784669
okay, i'm not surprised you're having trouble understanding me, but
go back to the oxford living dictionary and re-read all of the different meanings of 'common'.
then
try to hold all of those different meanings in your head together. i know that's going to be a little hard for you, but just try for me, okay?
a 'common whore', while being a redundancy in one sense of the term common, in another sense of the term could literally be construed as a 'peasant whore'. so your attempted distinction between this imagined peasant and this other imagined 'common whore' actually collapses under the weight of the words you used, a weight you weren't aware they possessed, because you are an ignorant boob.

>>12784702
Sod off.

>>12784707
that you're actually english is all the more embarrassing

>>12784581

>>12784723
you are still just completely missing the point.

>>12784717
I'M NOT ENLGISH YOU SNOTFACED NIGGER

>>12784334
>>Philosophy
>>History
>>Politics
Lol, even on those "specific" topics there are a vast amount of subpoints that can make an endless discussion and fuzz about it.
Not even 100 books would get you totally cover up on a single of those topics.
If you want to learn in such depth go to university, but i would rather prefer to have a general(superficial) knowledge on a vast amount of topics and explore them as much as i want instead of being a uber autist that can only tackle one and talk about that with other people just so he can flex on it. It seems less life consuming.
Do as your will desires.

here's an example from shakespeare where the speaker employs common in a double, and even triple sense:
Those parts of thee that the world's eye doth view,
Want nothing that the thought of hearts can mend:
All tongues (the voice of souls) give thee that due,
Uttering bare truth, even so as foes commend.
Thy outward thus with outward praise is crown'd;
But those same tongues that give thee so thine own
In other accents do this praise confound
By seeing farther than the eye hath shown.
They look into the beauty of thy mind,
And that, in guess, they measure by thy deeds;
Then (churls) their thoughts, although their eyes were kind,
To thy fair flower add the rank smell of weeds:
But why thy odour matcheth not thy show,
The solve is this, that thou dost common grow.

>>12784334
>Do you think one could be decently well read in a subject if instead of reading a lot of books covering different points of view, he chooses to just read one or two really important books in that subject? What books would you recommend?

Homer and Plato.