/lit/ - Literature

I disagree, but I respect your opinion. Thank-you for voicing it.

>>1911667
Agreed. He's good, but not all that freaking great.

Op is Ignatious

I like Mark Twain, but I don't like his writing.

Person in picture is Edvard Grieg.

Fail.

>>1911687

not according to wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Twain1909.jpg

>>1911694
He was probably trolling, and quite intelligent at that. I can see the resemblance.

>>1911700

>>he was probably trolling
>>intelligent

Yet not a very good troll. I don't even know who that person is.

^MO8G?

This is what a real American writer looks like.

>>1911705
You don't know who Grieg is? He's one of the most famous composers of the 19th century.

In The Halls of the Mountain King (from Peer Gynt):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrIYT-MrVaI
I'm 100% certain you know this music very well.

Or this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAbwMGZtIsY

Or this (the piano concerto):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxzpy1b1_BY

>>1911723

that's cool.

>>1911729
Ain't is, Shark, sir.

>>1911729

So anyway, can somebody please explain to me exactly why Twain is considered by so many people, let alone by William fucking Faulkner, to be 'the father of American literature' when he isn't nearly as good as Melville, Conrad, or James?

>>1911738

I think the reason why Joseph Conrad is not considered to be the "father of American literature" might have something to do with the fact that he was born in Poland, wrote in London, and never to my knowledge set foot in the United States.

>>1911738
Tain was a fun and popular man.

>>1911738

Perhaps because Conrad was a pole who lived in Britain? Ah no, fuck it, let's declare him the father of American Literature.

Cunt.

He's really not.

>>1911738
Melville is too gay to be the father of anything.

>>1911742
>>1911749

But no seriously, Melville is better.

>>1911759
Indeed, Melville is better. Except in his lifetime he was considered something between Dan Brown and Stephen King.

>>1911759

Yeah, sure - lazy, unthinking post. Called on your bullshit. HURR HURR I TROL U LOLOLOL DUUR DURR

Fuck off, you cunt.

>>1911776
Stop yelling at him, he's a good man, I feel it.

>>1911776

I am, and have been for many years, well aware of Conrad's nationality. The reason I said that was as a response to that jackass who seems to think my Mark Twain is overrated thread is his chance to spout off about 19th century classical music. You reacted to it like a total wannabe-intellectual douche, and this humored me. Honestly, like that's such a profound correction. So it was a troll.

>>1911768

Are you implying he was popular?

>>1911796
Twain was a modern classic, while Melville was considered successful, but pulpy.

>>1911789

Sure, whatevs.

Cunt.

>>1911796
Are you implying he wasn't?

>>1911789
>who seems to think my Mark Twain is overrated thread is his chance to spout off about 19th century classical music
You stupid little faggot don't even know who Grieg is, who the fuck are you to talk back to me, you ignorant little slut. LITTLE IGNORANT SLUT.

>>1911809

That wasn't my understanding.

>>1911808

>Mark Twain
>Overrated

>>1911817
This is the opening paragraph of his wikipedia article.

>Herman Melville (August 1, 1819 – September 28, 1891) was an American novelist, short story writer, essayist, and poet. He is best known for his novel Moby-Dick and the posthumous novella Billy Budd. His first three books gained much contemporary attention (the first, Typee, becoming a bestseller), but after a fast-blooming literary success in the late 1840s, his popularity declined precipitously in the mid-1850s and never recovered during his lifetime. When he died in 1891, he was almost completely forgotten. It was not until the "Melville Revival" in the early 20th century that his work won recognition, especially Moby-Dick which was hailed as one of the literary masterpieces of both American and world literature. He was the first writer to have his works collected and published by the Library of America.

>>1911823

Well, to be honest my friend, I think Nabokov overall had pretty shit tastes. I don't like Emerson, Gogol, or Poe, and his criticisms of Dostoevsky are full of shit. And he, too, is actually pretty overrated when you think about it, though he was a very talented man.

>>1911835
Poe was a mess worse than Lovecraft, but Gogol, you take your faggot words back, you homo. Gogol was a genius.

>>1911826

Now that I honestly did not know. I always thought of him as being a near totally unrecognized artist. I guess he was just under appreciated. That's crazy.

>>1911835
>Nabokov
>Overrated

>>1911844
Yes, he was a popular writer than wasn't considered very serious. Moby Dick wasn't unknown - everyone read it, but everyone thought it was utter shit, and THEN Melville became poor and forgotten.

>>1911835
>>1911835
Emerson and Gogol are pretty amazing. His criticisms of Dostoevsky are exagerrated (saying he didn't write a single good page) but he's pretty on the money when it comes to Dostoevsky.

Dostoevsky was not that great.

>>1911843

You caught me bro, I'm just a gigantic faggot with a longing for huge cock. Anyway, with Gogol, I do respect him just the same as with Nabokov. I mean he's certainly better than a shit-tier overrated unliterary writer like say Mark Twain. But I've never personally enjoyed his writing. Maybe it's just got to do with translation.

With Poe, at his best he was better than Lovecraft, but his best only constitutes like four short stories. His poetry is awful.

>>1911860
>The Raven
>bad

>>1911860
Poe's poetry is better than his short stories. Twain deserves all the hype for Huck Finn. What you don't realize is that people love Twain in spite of his flaws.

Everything you say is embarrassing.

>>1911860
Gogol is indeed almost untranslatable. His language is completely crazy. That's always a problem.

>>1911859

there's one flaw in your logic there, comrade.

>>Dostoevsky was that great. As a literary psychologist, he's unparalleled. Also he basically invented modern fiction.

Fuck Emerson, he's more overrated than Twain. The only transcendentalist worth a shit is Whitman.

Shakespeare is the most overrated of all.

Tolstoy agrees with me.

>>1911867
>Twain deserves all the hype for Huck Finn
It was good, but not great. Linguistic stuff were at times marvellous, but story itself was sub-par, and after the point where Sawyer reappeared later on, everything was plain garbage.

God, Sawyer is such a faggot.

>>1911876
Except Tolstoy is himself overrated. I hate Tolstoy. He didn't even have good enough taste to appreciate Beethoven.

>>1911847
>>1911865

Indeed and INDEED.

Sorry Vladimir, but it's true.

>>1911877

Really, you think so? I always thought the style and dialog were the most overrated part of all. And yeah, exactly, apart from that it's stupid and boring as hell.

>>1911879
>>1911876
I'm sorry but these are the two most childish, ignorant opinions anyone could ever hold.

>>1911879
>implying music taste affects writing ability
>hating Tolstoy
War and Peace is some of the best shit ever written, bro

>>1911879
If you're as good a writer as Tolstoy is, you can afford to have the most batshit opinions and get away with it.

A little turd sandwich from /lit/ does not.

>>1911888
Tolstoy held one of these childish and ignorant opinions. Specifically, that Shakespeare is overrated. He wrote works on how Shakespeare fucking sucks dick. Also, he considered Beethoven inconsequential. So, what does that make him?

>>1911894

I completely agree, and the same goes for Nabokov. Btw, I'm OP, and that wasn't me saying fuck Tolstoy. Love that guy.

And Twain is still completely overrated.

>>1911896
Again, you are far too much of a manchild to be given internet access.

He didn't say Shakespeare "fucking sucks dick" he found him to be extremely immoral. There's a difference.

>>1911894
Except he isn't very good. He's only popular for his preachy shit, which is outright garbage. His actual literary works that are okay, were not basis for his popularity at the time at all.

And today, only Oprah reads him anyway.

>>1911890

>War and Peace is some of the best shit ever written, bro

What else did your high school English school tell you?

Grow up.

>>1911900
> Except he isn't very good. He's only popular for his preachy shit, which is outright garbage. His actual literary works that are okay, were not basis for his popularity at the time at all.


0/10

you're approaching Brownbear/Stagolee shit-tier trolling, son.

>>1911896

A crazy old shithead who happened to be one of the greatest writers who ever lived.

>>1911899
No. He considered Shakespeare to be not worth of any sort of attention. What he said was, basically, that Shakespeare is overrated. As simple as that. I wonder if his papers on how Shakespeare is a shitty playwright were translated into English; can you read Russian? I can link you to the originals.

>>1911909
He found King Lear and Shakespeare as a whole to be very immoral.

Bloom is on the money when he talks about his influence anxiety. Tolstoy is basically the moral response to someone offended by Shakespeare's nihilism. They're both in the upper-most tier of writing.

>>1911902
Actually, High School English taught us to revere Shakespeare.

>>1911916
Tolstoy's moralisms were actually pretty fucking immoral themselves. He considered fucking on a wedding night a mortal sin destructive of everything that is good.

>>1911919
I don't think you understand morality and immorality. Which isn't saying I agree with Tolstoy's views, but that's not what immorality is.

I disagree with Tolstoy's opinions on Shakespeare and Beethoven, but I still think he is a magnificent writer.

And honestly, I respect him for not being afraid to voice such strong opinions.

>Но, прочтя одно за другим считающиеся лучшими его произведения: «Короля Лира», «Ромео и Юлию», «Гамлета», «Макбета», я не только не испытал наслаждения, но почувствовал неотразимое отвращение, скуку и недоумение о том, я ли безумен, находя ничтожными и прямо дурными произведения, которые считаются верхом совершенства всем образованным миром, или безумно то значение, которое приписывается этим образованным миром произведениям Шекспира.

Let me translate this for you, gentlemen. It's a dirty translation, but accurate. Doing on the spot.

>However, having read one after another what are considered his best works: "king Leare", "Romeo and Juliet", "Hamlet", "Macbeth, a wasn't merely pleased, but felt an immense distaste, boredom and confusion at how whether it's me that is mad, having found negligible and outright awful the works that are considered the epitome of perfection by all who are educated, or whether the very meaning is mad that is ascribed by the educated society to the works of Shakespeare.

>>1911867

well look here, I didn't even see that.

To correct you, good sir, saying 'people love Twain in spite of his flaws' is basically agreeing with me. And no, Twain's best work is Letters From The Earth, and even that isn't very good. As a satirist he's didactic, annoying, and not even funny or witty. He as a writer embodies American conceit.

Poe is a godawful poet and writer altogether mostly. But his best stories, The Cask of Amontillado and The Masque of the Red Death, are great. He also apparently translates to French well, but eh.

>>1911919
Immorality does not mean archaic morality.

>>1911931
The whole work, where Tolstoy keeps bashing Shakespeare in general terms:
http://www.rvb.ru/tolstoy/01text/vol_15/01text/0332.htm

He was a faggot. His novels are okay, but nothing special. His stories are, simply put, propaganda of idiocy.

>>1911933
No.

> To correct you, good sir, saying 'people love Twain in spite of his flaws' is basically agreeing with me. And no, Twain's best work is Letters From The Earth, and even that isn't very good. As a satirist he's didactic, annoying, and not even funny or witty. He as a writer embodies American conceit.

No one is agreeing with you here.

>>1911938

they're BOTH good writers, now come on...

> Twain overrated
> Shakespeare is shitty
> Tolstoy is shitty

Who let all the children onto /lit/? Oh wait, they've always been here.

Time for me to get the fuck off god-awful board. It's a disgrace.

>>1911944
Actually, I think both are overrated, but Shakespeare sure is way better than Tolstoy. At least Shakespeare wasn't a preachy little imbecile. And SHakespeare had a sense of humour.

Overrated is a near meaningless concept and it becomes even emptier when it's applied to giants.

>>1911942

>>overrated

>>'people love him in spite of his flaws'

You see, the problem there is that there are other writers throughout the history of mankind who've been less flawed than Twain, not to mention far more talented, but have also received less overall admiration than him due to circumstance. Just as well, there have been countless authors more inventive, innovative, and influential to other writers than him. In your eyes, Twain's 'flawed'. In mine, he's shit. But that he's overrated is indisputable.

>>1911957
Actually, not. It means "not outright bad, but not nearly as good as some say", which is perfectly clear to anyone with half a brain.

Okay, now that this >>1911947 cocksucker left, we can finally discuss this.

>>1911947

Right, because no adult would hold the opinion that Shakespeare is a shit writer. Except Tolstoy.

BAWWWW A CHILDRENS NOVELIST IS OVERRATED

LETS WASTE TIME AND ENERGY DISCUSSING THIS

>>1911965
Tolstoy is so great in writing whiny, preachy oversized novels that lack of good taste and outright idiocy can all be forgiven, see.

To me personall the realization that Tolstoy is a freaking idiot came when I read Karenina. There was this one passage in the middle where Karenina is watching him ride a horse and accidentally break her spine. Like, IT'S LIKE HE'S RIDING HER, RIGHT?! GEDDIT?! That was freaking distasteful for a first novel, let alone for something written after a four-tome all-over-the-place-I-hate_Napoleon monstrocity like War and Peace, and from that point on I started being more critical of the imbecile.

>>1911973

Your opinions are gay.

>>1911961
To start, fuckwit, it in no way means "not outright bad" because it's relative to the rating you believe the subject has. I can think a giant piece of shit is overrated because people only think it's kind of shitty. So you're stupid wrong right off the bat.

The part that makes it meaningless is the fact that you can't ever quantify the 'rating' something/someone has. This becomes even more evident with things that are famous examples of their medium because you're conflating their popularity as a symbol with popularity among their actual circles.

what you're actually saying is: "I dont' like X" except in a super arrogant way where you pretend you're discerning.

meaningless

>>1911970

You're a fag, and here's why. Twain is lauded as a genius satirist and author to a RIDICULOUS extent. Even his kid books, as far as kid books go, are shitty, overblown kid books.

>>1911980
>The part that makes it meaningless is the fact that you can't ever quantify the 'rating' something/someone has.
I can and I have. Mark Twain is rated very high by most people. There, I have successfully done what you just said was impossible, and with extreme precision, too.

>>1911844
People and critics of the day only liked Typee and Omoo. They hated Moby Dick and his other works. I was reading a review of his latter works and everybody was shitting on him and saying he should go back to writing Typee type literature. Basically, they liked his worse stuff only. He was all but driven out of prose writing only 10 years into his career.

>>1911982
>rated very high by most people
Tons of precision there

I don't mean literally meaningless, I mean so insignificant as to be negligible.

>>1911973
To be frank, that scene is one of the greatest, most moving in all of literature.

saging because this is a pointless flame war

>>1911987

That makes perfect sense to me. Of course Moby Dick was unbelievably ahead of its time.

>>1911990

Yeah, but you're wrong about that too bucko.

>>1911996

>>1911949

>SHakespeare had a sense of humour.

You are the worst kind of human. It's not funny and if you think it's funny you must have a shitty sense of humour.

>>1911996
naw, you're wrong and your opinion is overrated.

>>1911949
>And Shakespeare had a sense of humour.
I am currently reading War and Peace and I have found certain parts to be quite funny.

Shakespeare's comedies, on the other hand, are notoriously unfunny to modern readers.

>>1912027
shakespeare's comedies are unfunny, but at the same time shakespeare absolutely had a wicked sense of humor. shakespeare's comedies aren't funny because comedy during shakespeare's time meant something very different from comedy now.

>>1912019

we'll just have to agree to disagree

>>1912033
>>1912027
Shakespeare's comedies are hilarious. Watch a decent bunch of actors do them instead of just reading them--he's the father of all modern character-based comedy.

>>1912042

Before I gave up on his comedies I saw one play when I was younger. The only thing that stayed with me was the forced laughter coming from the adults sitting around me, I felt sick almost. There's nothing "droll" about the situations or the characters, it's just painful.

KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD
KILL EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD

>>1912079

angsty sixteen-year-old 'writer' detected.

>>1912009

*like*

>>1912079
lol, mad

I wish they'd sensor all that nigger talk in those twain books. So offensive to white guilt

>>1912147
For next time

Read The Mysterious Stranger and tell me that Twain is overrated.

>>1912184

tryingtoohard.jpg

>>1912211

Okay. Done. Mark Twain is overrated.

>>1912211
My favorite thing I have read by Twain.