/lit/ - Literature

>Refutes an entire island
How did he do it?

>>17123372
>WAHHHH THIS THING THAT ISNT IN MY LANGUAGE BAD THIS THING THAT IS IN MY LANGUAGE GOOD
Why are humans so predictable and cringe? It almost makes you wonder if either of them were ever good at all.

>>17123407
>All I needed were a computer, my personal library, and the complete works of Gustavo Bueno

>>17123417
Found the Angloid bugman.

>>17123372
>a Spaniard complaining about predatory inperialism
Should have conquered some people interested in reading I guess.

>>17123372
basado

>>17123372
le hispanophile man

>>17123457
Whose language do you speak now?

>>17123467
The Spanish Empire was a generative empire, not a predatory one. Read Gustavo Bueno.

>>17123647
Yeah, just look at how Latin America flourishes! Fucking retard.

>>17123725
I guess you are just retarded.

>>17123372
>spaniards seething over English supremacy
Like clockwork

>>17123372
Cervantes was a hack. I'm a better writer.

>>17123372

>>17123647
>generative empire
no
t.Argentinian

>>17124659

>>17123372
>all of Germany was subjugated by English imperialism
Is he retarded?

>>17124687
Yes

>>17124773
Glad I'll never read him then.

>>17123647
>yeah this wasn't REAL imperialism
Holy cope

>>17124794
It's only bad when other people do it, see?

>>17124687
Protestant nations.
And no one escapes from anglo cultural imperialism.

>>17123457

Found the angry med

>>17123372
Hamlet is better than Don Quixote

>>17123372
>predatory imperialism

>>17126886
It’s certainly better than the first half of don quixote, the claiming of which as a transcendent work of literature by the spanish makes me deeply concerned of how much they must love jokes about vomit and faeces. The second part however is truly great.

>>17126886
nice bait bro

>tfw anglospeakers will never taste and understand Don Quixote like it has to be in their life

>>17123725
>Latin America adopts liberal democracy aka French/American crap instead Monarchism.
>Look at how Latin America flourishes!
Indeed. That said how is the caliphate of Europe today?

>>17123647
hell yeah. The Spanish Empire had provinces, not colonnies.

>>17126908
>claim to fame is literally one book
Sad!

>>17123457
>>17126916
>Angloid
>anglospeakers
Cringe. Do you only like Cervantes better because of your native language? I mean, that's fine, but at least be honest.

>>17123647
>reduces the native population of Hispaniola from 400,000 to 200 (reduction of 99.95%) through brutal slavery
>ayayay papi I kno nohthing about any cruelty, only the Anglo empire was cruel
The Spaniard perhaps rivals the Hebrew in perfidy.

>>17126940
Exactly
>Shakespeare: 39 plays, 154 sonnets, some miscellaneous work
>Cervantes: one (admittedly long) novel
I like Cervantes and I think comparing the two is ultimately meaningless, but being so pissed off at Shakespeare like this guy is seems like some insecure cope.

>>17127025
>an anglo calling others jews
kek

>>17127025
Nobody says that there wasn't any cruelty, the distinction between generative and predatory empires is not about that. Rome was a generative empire, yet they also exploited and murdered some of the conquered peoples.
And no, most of the population of La Española died because of diseases, not due to slavary.

>>17127043
>ignoring Numancia
>ignoring the Novelas Ejemplares
>ignoring Persilas y Segisminda
>ignoring Viaje del Parnaso

>>17127093
>ignoring Cervantes works that only gay Spaniards care about
Again, I think that comparing the two is pointless, but even Shakespeare’s lesser known plays are more well known than those. Maybe thats “anglo predatory imperialism” but even if we ignore the popularity contest any of Shakespeare’s poetry is better than Cervantes and for every non poetic work of Cervantes there is a Shakespeare play that is better.

>>17127153
>Shakespeare’s poetry is better than Cervantes and for every non poetic work of Cervantes there is a Shakespeare play that is better.
t. has never read Cervantes

>>17127057
>a nation famed for their religious veneration of a Jew even reaching totalitarianism calling others jewish

>>17127078
>most of the population of La Española died because of diseases
The same could be said of North America.
What was so generative about the Spanish empire over the British empire that Hispanic countries have failed to reach the same success despite greater natural resources?

>>17127190
England and its offspring were the greatest promoters of the Judeo-liberal system, for which we can thank for much of today's decay.

>>17123372
How can one chin be so weak?

>>17127212
The distinction is simple: empires are generative if, despite the actions of colonial exploitation, they turn colonized societies into societies with full rights. In other words, it fosters the transformation, as a universal empire, of the intervened societies into culturally and socioeconomically developed political societies. The Empire of Alexander the Great, the Roman Empire and the Spanish Empire would be clear examples.
On the other hand, they are predatory if they maintain a structural exploitative relationship with the societies they organize. This means that the empire, in this case, prevents the political development of such societies to take advantage of their socioeconomic resources, even destroying them. Take as an example the English Empire and the Dutch Empire.
Generative empires share language and technology with intervened societies, while the predatory empires use their own technology to destroy the reality of the intervened society.
A characteristic that manifests the nature of predatory empires is the refusal of biological mixing with the autochthonous population of the occupied territory.

>>17127293
Based buenoist

>>17127293
Holy based

Can someone explain to me what is actually great about Cervantes? Don Quixote is fucking shit

>>17123725
t. Butthurt anglo

>>17127945
There's nothing great about him, it's just emperor's new clothes

>>17127293
Boy do you have it inverted in the case of the Spanish empire, it's pathetic. The only way the Spanish empire was "generative" was through a program of mass rape. The true generative empire was the UK vis a vis its eventual dominion colonies

>>17123372
This guy is monolingual so his opinions must be disregarded. If he hasn't read Shakespeare in English then he hasn't read Shakespeare.

>>17128448
I agree with this. He's a hypocrite too, claiming that unless you read Don Quixote in Spanish you haven't read it, and then drawing comparisons to Shakespeare despite being admittedly monolingual. I'm Spanish and even I see that he's full of shit.

>>17127093
>Persilas y Segisminda
I have read that. At one point a sailor drowns and whole drowning gives a half page monologue that goes basically "AH SEÑOR I SEE NOW ES MUY BUENO HOW COULD I EVER DOUBT YOU BUT ALAS IM DYING AJAJAJAJA." Ignoring this ridiculously bathetic scene the book is replete with stock didacticism and the fact that Cervantes considered it his best does make one ponder whether DQ was a struck of luck rather than of deliberate genius.

>>17128448
>This guy is monolingual
>>17128610
>being admittedly monolingual

Prove it, faggot.

>>17128706
0:42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpCD9T-Of40

>>17123372
>Filtered by Shakespeare
>Filtered by Leopardi
>Filtered by Kant
>Filtered by Hegel
>Filtered by Faulkner
>Filtered by Lorca
>Filtered by Borges

See, he's the greatest contemporary literary critic because he refuses to understand half of the books he criticises. He fools himself into honestly believing that they're nonsense or kitsch, so when he shits on them he transmits so much pathos that it sounds convincing to people who haven't read them.

>>17127293
buenista basado

>>17128718
that's out of context, but I don't think he's saying he is monolingual.

>>17128807
Agreed, that clip doesn't prove anything. However, there is another instance of him saying that Anglos will never know the greatness of El Quijote because some things can only be appreciated if Spanish is your first language. That same statement can be turned on its head and applied to English and Hamlet, German and Faust, etc.

>>17128807
I considered that, but it seems pretty definitive. I could still be wrong, but until I get another source I'll continue to assume that he's monolingual.

>>17128827
I think he actually said that you need to read it in Spanish, not that Spanish has to be your first language. But yeah, that was my point in this post >>17128610

How can I be as cool as him?

>>17128835
It's a dodgy quote. Minute 14 of the video that was posted earlier.
"Hay cosas que sólo se saben en español. En el español nativo."
My interpretation of "native Spanish" is either Spanish as a first language or at least at a bilingual level.

>>17127293
Preposterous, refuted by simply glancing at the globe and comparing the societies of modern British Empire and modern Spanish Empire.

>>17127025
>>reduces the native population of Hispaniola from 400,000 to 200 (reduction of 99.95%) through brutal slavery
Not even true and you know that's a lie. The population was reduced because of disease.

>>17129039
I suppose that if you just look at Australia, Canada, maybe India and arguably the United Sates, and then proceed to ignore Belice, Jamaica, Bahamas, Guyana, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Nigeria, Nambia, South Africa, Bostwana, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania, Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea as the societies that were part of the British Empire.

>>17129134
>Belice, Jamaica, Bahamas, Guyana, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Nigeria, Nambia, South Africa, Bostwana, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Tanzania, Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea as the societies that were part of the British Empire.
Literally who?

>>17129134
anglos BTFO

>>17129150
Exactly.

>>17123372
test

>>17129134
>>17129134
Almost all of these countries were only subject to British rule in the most literal of ways with extremely little hands-on governance from the core of the Empire. Beyond that, and especially the countries where there was significant British colonial investment, these countries have had very tumultuous histories since de-colonization. Somalia, for example, swapping between the two super powers throughout the Cold War is certainly has vastly more explanatory power regarding Somalia's current dysfunction than British rule.
As a final aside- if one of the qualifications of a generative colony is endowing rights to the citizenry, then we're caught in a web of chauvinisms. The fact remains that you've listed most of the countries in Arabia, all of which are primarily governed by their native Sharia Law, a repressive and chauvinistic legal system. Did the British fail because they did not sufficiently dominate these Arabs into abandoning Sharia in favour of Common Law? Replace their chauvinism with Anglo chauvinism?

>>17129253
>Beyond that, and especially the countries where there was significant British colonial investment, these countries have had very tumultuous histories since de-colonization
Does this not also ring true for the post colonial Hispanic world? Does not the effect of the influence two superpowers that led the Cold War also influence the current outcome of Latin America?
>Almost all of these countries were only subject to British rule in the most literal of ways with extremely little hands-on governance from the core of the Empire.
Is this not what Bueno refers to as "predatory", rather than generative?
>Did the British fail because they did not sufficiently dominate these Arabs into abandoning Sharia in favour of Common Law? Replace their chauvinism with Anglo chauvinism?
They would have failed if colonialism was based on the idea of "spreading superior values to those that don't have them", instead of that being a smokescreen in the pursuit of profit. I wouldn't say that the British failed in that regard.
In any case, I think it's a fair assessment to say that the colonies that were left much better off after British occupation are those in which the natives were the least numerous or, in the case of India, were so divided among themselves.

I don't intend to defend the virtues of colonialism with this post, it just bothers me how when discussing English colonial success people only think of two or three countries and ignore everything else whenever it's convenient.

Everyone in this thread is a retard and faggot.It is possible to like many writers from as many countries.The greats write about the human condition which is universal.There are many objectively good writers but once you get to that level, its purely subjective.I guess what I'm trying to say is that you're all faggots and should neck yourselves with your obsession with ranking writers as if they were a listverse article

>>17128448
He is not monolingual. He studied in England in 1982, and has done lectures on the US.
Also, has translated texts from Italian, French and German, so it is safe to assume he can speaak those too.

>>17128718
>>17128718
Out of context. He is not saying he is monolingual, he is saying that he speaks Spanish, not Castillian, which is just the Spanish spoken on Castille.

>>17129477
I see.

>>17123372
Did Cervantes coin over 1,000 new words and phrases to his language, many of which are still in common use today?
Shakespeare is every bit as genius as Cervantes, but for different reasons.

>>17129453
>The truly great literature was the friends we made along the way.
Riveting.

>>17129134
You mean the countries where the British didn’t violently replace the natives as the Spanish did throughout all of South America ?

>>17127293
>it’s another “non-white country guilty of the same imperialism as white countries wants to pretend that their imperialism was totally ok so they can stay in the oppression-club” episode
Cringe, it’s pathetic that they keep trying this, next you’ll have Mongolia and turkey claiming to have been a purely positive force whilst they raped millions and castrated hundreds of thousands respectively.

>>17127293
>the Spanish empire known for its regular as clockwork treasure-ship deliveries to her native shores
Frankly astonished at the absolute pissing gall of the rampaging Donnishman. "Generative empire." What a joke.

>>17129636
>Spanish
>non-White
Don't you have bandmates to kill, Varg?

>>17129636
Because ot wasn't the same imperialism moron.

>>17129617
Funny how the only successful countries the British Empire left are those in which they practically committed genocide against the local population.
Natives, mixed or not, still exist outside of reservations all over America beneath the United States, let's just put it that way.

>>17129464
What can be asserted without evidence can be dissmissed without evidence
Chupa mi pija maricón

>All these buttblasted anglos.

>>17128447
>>17129655
Did you even read the text?

>>17127293
Basado

Este vídeo me enamoró.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=3773&v=UlW5Vu9GJyA

https://youtu.be/5t3BI7rykkU
HOLY SHIT, IT'S BACK

>>17127293
multo basado

>>17127293
I know that British and Spanish colonization are not the same, and I guess the latter is "better" than the first, but what you describe about predatory empires also existed in the Spanish colonies. For example
>they turn colonized societies into societies with full rights.
This never happened in Spanish colonies, and if you were to read any of the texts of the Latin American ""founding fathers"" (for lack of a better way to call them in English) you'd see that was one of the chief reasons a fight for independence took place in the first place. That is, even criollos did not have the same rights as an Spain-born Spaniard did, let alone mestizos, blacks or indians. This is also something which went hand in hand with the economic and political limitations which restricted the possibility of independent political and economic development in the colonies. Plus, I don’t know how you can claim that there was not an economically exploitative aspect of Spanish colonization.

>>17123457
everytime I hear someone say "anglo," i remember that the discord is filled with sudacas living in literal favelas, getting their houses pelted with rocks lmao

>>17129057
you mean the disease imported by the slavers?

>>17123647

Please stop kidding yourselves. I cannot in simple terms describe what a retarded position it is to posit that Spain's imperialism was benign; but if I were to try, just look at the state of everything which Spain touched (and Spain itself for that matter lol) and compare it to everything which England did. There is absolutely no denial of the superiority of the latter. It is not just coincidence, but the direct result of Spain's extremely brutal, almost pirate like system of claiming a territory, enslaving or exterminating natives, and then proceeding to plunder it for all it was worth, developing highly corrupt (and still existent) plantation hierarchies and plantation families which stifle representative government, as well as neglecting to develop any infrastructure within said regions, leaving them shattered and impoverished.

I have to say as well, nothing has killed my desire to read Spanish literature more thoroughly than this mouthbreathing, fish-lipped faggot and his sycophants. It wouldn't be so bad if they had actual arguments, but its literally just slogan after catchphrase after baseless contention and its getting to be too much.

Do I live in an Anglophone country? Yes. Am I Anglo/British myself? No. There is no emotive element in what I'm saying. I have French and German besides English, but I simply recognise that, in terms of literature, Spain is a third-rate nation at the best, with the entirety of its relevancy contained within a hundred-year period. (this is objectively true). The most you can do to argue against that is bring in your Hispanics, but even then there is literally nothing worth reading besides Borges.

>>17123372
should i learn spanish to read him?

>>17131941
>nothing worth reading besides borges
i'll have you know cortazar is a great writer. not a genius, but great

>>17127293

>they are predatory if they maintain a structural exploitative relationship with the societies they organize.

What the fuck do you call making the printing press illegal in the colonies while simultaneously working the native peoples to death in gold and silver mines?

>Generative empires share language and technology

Ok well Spain didn't lol

>A characteristic that manifests the nature of predatory empires is the refusal of biological mixing with the autochthonous population of the occupied territory.

What do you call the Casta system? You are aware that all the mixing took place during the first wave of brutal mass rape, and was then legally prevented in a way more extreme and intricate than anywhere else in the world?

>>17123372
>Jesús G. Maestro
No me esperaba esto en /lit/.

>>17132012
Tenemos Jesúsgmaestroposting desde hace meses (Y tambien gustavobuenoposting ocasionalmente)

>>17131996

Let me modify that there is nothing on the level of the Spanish Golden Age besides Borges, then.

>>17124659
kek
but seriously how does the blue dollar keep going down?? it's just absurd at this point desu.

>>17127153
>for every non poetic work of Cervantes there is a Shakespeare play that is better.
HOLY COPE

>>17123725
>Yeah, just look at how Latin America flourishes! Fucking retard.

in terms of literary output, yes, even better than the angloid community (a.k.a Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa)

>>17131804
There were all considered free men, and had similar rights before the law (Indians even had benefits over Spaniards on trials). The problem with the criollos started with the Borbounic Reforms, and still, doesn't change at all the classification of Spain as a generative empire.
And btw, neither me nor Bueno ever claimed that Spain was not exploitative. Let me quote Bueno himself:
Through its particular acts of violence, extortion and even enslavement, through which these universal empires developed, the truth is that the Roman Empire ended up granting citizenship to practically all the urban centers of its domains, and Spanish Empire, which always considered its subjects as free men, provided the precise conditions for the transformation of its Viceroyalties or Provinces into constitutional Republics.
And again
>There is no doubt, of course, that the conquest of America was carried out amid innumerable outrages, cruelty, extortion, and criminal acts; but most of these actions must be charged to the account of individuals and not to account of the policy of the Empire. Posed on this scale, the behavior of the Hispanic Empire is no different from the behavior of any other predatory empire. However, the question would be poorly posed in this way, because either we use a "molecular" scale, or we use a "molar" scale. The Hispanic Empire, like any other Empire, casts "historical figures" (on a molar scale) that, good or bad, can only be the result of the activities or groups of particular (molecular) individuals presided over by psychological (ethological) laws linked to ambition, envy, fear, pride, hardness of heart ... It is about recognizing the reality of an ongoing dialectic between its "molar" and "molecular" figures.
>>17131941
Everything you said in this post can easily be discarded.
The current state of Hispanic America and Spain has little to do with the empire.
Then you go say things out of your ass, like that Spain enslaved and exterminated the natives. Do you know what the Laws of Burgos were? You know that slavery and cruelty towards the natives was prohibited, and that the natives could denounce cases of cruelty done by Spaniards, carrying trials on which they had adventages?
And saying that Spain developed no infranstructure is simply retarded, when they build a lot of cities, hospitals, churches and universities.
>>17132003
Again, no one denies that there was cruelty, thing is that it was prohibited by the Law. Also, the Spanish Empire was more than gold, mines and slaves.
About the Castas, there was no such a thing, that's just a modern misinterpretation of some terms used back then.
>>17129655
Ah yes, the Quinto Real. Only 20% of that gold went to the metropoli (less than that, if you consider the pirate attacks), while the rest remained on the Viceroyalties, and was inverted on different things, such as building.

>>17133052
>Through its particular acts of violence, extortion and even enslavement, through which these universal empires developed, the truth is that the Roman Empire ended up granting citizenship to practically all the urban centers of its domains, and Spanish Empire, which always considered its subjects as free men, provided the precise conditions for the transformation of its Viceroyalties or Provinces into constitutional Republics.
Forgot to greentext it

>>17127293
None of this is even true. The Spanish exploited just as much as the English, if not more. Read Columbus’ journal and letters.Read Cortez’s letters. Read any primary source from Spanish colonization and compare it to the English (Bradford, Smith, the Mathers, “City on the Hill”, Sir Walter Raleigh). Stop peddling this drivel /lit/.

>>17131941
Based.

>>17133113
You didn't even understand the text, right?
Bueno was well aware of the cruelty commited by some of the conquerors, but that was not the point. Read >>17133052

>>17133180
You’re right, you melancholic eeyore. The current state of the Hispanic world has little to do with an empire that died long ago and lasted for only a little over one hundred years with any relevance.

>>17131941
How do you measure literary relevance? There have been 11 or so Spanish-speaking Nobel Prize for Literature laureates, plus many other authors who didn't win it for whatever reason but have world-wide recognition (Borges, first and foremost).

>>17123372
And yet you needed English to express this. Curious!
-Anon, Turning Point /lit/

>>17133296
Maestro BTFO

>>17123452
>tfw Maestro is not only /lit/ but also /fa/ as fuck and /mu/ too.

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

>Shakespeare
>1600s England
>Imperialism

>>17133052

Who the fuck cares about whatever self-evidentially ineffectual system of frontier law de facto existed??? Why is Brazil and the Caribbean majority black if there was no slavery? Why are there literal thousands of primary source accounts of bragging cruelty if these laws were so righteous and effectual? Why where there entire revolutions lead by the criollos if the Castas were arbitrary, ignorant "misinterpretations" of the reality of the Spanish Colonies? Why did they feel compelled to revolt and assert independence if life was so hunky-dory under Spain? Why do they still resent and hate the Spaniards today?

The British Colonies were called "mandates" too, and had an illusion of rights to freedom and citizenship under certain absurd conditions as well, but, guess what, we just don't bullshit ourselves into believing that these were anything BUT façades, or that we somehow did the natives a favour by murdering, raping and enslaving them. Get your head out of our arse, you insufferable dago.

>>17133277

I definitely don't use nobel prizes. At the most basic level, I should the best measure of literary relevance is if the work survives translation, and goes on to have significant impact and influence on the literatures of languages other than that in which they were originally written.

>>17134273
Learn to read. I never said there was no slavery, but that it was prohibited to enslave the natives. By the way, Brazil was not part of Spain, but of Portugal, and they had a completely different system.
About the Criollos, I mentioned right there that these problems started mainly with the Borbonic Reforms. And the revolutions were not only because of that, there were a lot of other factors that played into them. About why they still hate Spain, that has a name, it is the Spanish Black Legend, which is still being debunked today by contemporary historians.

>>17134326
Forgot to mention, but there were a lot of cases of natives fighting along the realists during the Independence wars. You can take as an example the Araucanians in Chile.

>>17134218
Shakespeare's work stopped existing in the 18th century you retard?