/lit/ - Literature

>>19160899
Probably because culture shifted left.

>>19160899
>the good literature we have today
Hilarious.

well, you are an illiterate so you have dumb opinions

>>19160899
>Why is it that almost 100% of the good literature we have today comes from people leaning left politically?
Because the publishing industry is controlled by a (((clique of people))) that actively ostracize, defame and deplatform right-wingers.

What contemporary books do you consider good? Not arguing, genuinely asking. For me most lit drops off in interest/quality around the 1950s.

Because Ezra and his friends lost.

>>19160899
I'm not sure why you need someone to answer this question for you, it seems pretty clear to me. A certain event about 75 years ago the most vital "right-wing" movement suffered a decimating blow, leaving the world culture to be sculpted by Red Team and Blue Team.
Now of course there's only really Blue Team to consider as far as literature and the majority of Blue Team's university/media intelligentsia is socialist (left leaning), while "right leaning" groups tend to coalesce in Big Money and so don't write literature. Since almost all the major intellectual brainpower capable of writing a good novel happens to be lukewarm neoliberal that's what we end up with. Now no truly "far left" author can produce good literature, far left authors just produce sob stories about black people or aboriginals or muh vagina.

>>19160899
Because you mistake bourgeois liberalism for proletarian autogestation.

i think at some point just about all cultural communities hit a point where standing out meant producing art that pushed boundaries in big ways which obviously didn't sit well with more conservative people, and this caused them to be pushed out of artistic communities, or even wide spread self-segregation

It's just market society. It completely destroys any traditional sense of community and belonging that we have, so new meme identities and lifestyles that revolve around specific cultural activities/hobbies emerge to fill the gap, and because the market dynamic is always trying to optimize for the most profitable demographics one of them eventually emerges as the most aggressive consumers and effectively monopolizes it.

It happened to music as the industry purged itself of everything that didn't fit into the "youth culture" model it developed throughout the 20th century, happened to literature as it pandered more and more to well-educated libs who bought magazines, is currently happening to cinema and television now that the industry knows teenage girls will watch a hundred new shows a year if you keep shitting them out, etc etc

>>19160899
Ezra Pound was left wing and fascism was left wing. They fought against totalitarian bolshevism and totalitarian capitalism. Immortal heroes. RIP

>>19160976
a big chunk of the modernists were fascists or sympathizers

Because Right wing positions don't allow for creative thought. Being a right winger means you're against progress and intectualism. Not allowing for any sort of abstract or creative thought

>>19160940
anything by Ted Hughes

>>19161390
I didn’t care for his Ovid stuff and I didn’t much like his crow stuff, What do you recommend in particular?

>>19161226
Art by it's very nature is bourgeoisie

>>19161397
Tales of Ovid and Birthday Letters and The Iron Man

Also George Oppen, who is probably the best American poet of the 20th century, wrote his best poems in the 60s and 70s.

>>19161437
Read the tales so I’ll try the others, I’ve read some George oppen, I don’t think he’s as good as Donald Sidney fryer nor Clark Ashton smith. What do you recommend by him whose better than their stuff?

>>19161437
Here’s the first stanza from a long poem of smith’s.

Bow down: I am the emperor of dreams;
I crown me with the million-colored sun
Of secret worlds incredible, and take
Their trailing skies for vestment when I soar,
Throned on the mounting zenith, and illume
The spaceward-flown horizons infinite.
Like rampant monsters roaring for their glut,
The fiery-crested oceans rise and rise,
By jealous moons maleficently urged
To follow me for ever; mountains horned
With peaks of sharpest adamant, and mawed
With sulphur-lit volcanoes lava-langued,
Usurp the skies with thunder, but in vain;
And continents of serpent-shapen trees,
With slimy trunks that lengthen league by league,
Pursue my flight through ages spurned to fire
By that supreme ascendance; sorcerers,
And evil kings, predominanthly armed
With scrolls of fulvous dragon-skin whereon
Are worm-like runes of ever-twisting flame,
Would stay me; and the sirens of the stars,
With foam-like songs from silver fragrance wrought,
Would lure me to their crystal reefs; and moons
Where viper-eyed, senescent devils dwell,
With antic gnomes abominably wise,
Heave up their icy horns across my way.
But naught deters me from the goal ordained
By suns and eons and immortal wars,
And sung by moons and motes; the goal whose name
Is all the secret of forgotten glyphs
By sinful gods in torrid rubies writ
For ending of a brazen book; the goal
Whereat my soaring ecstasy may stand
In amplest heavens multiplied to hold
My hordes of thunder-vested avatars,
And Promethèan armies of my thought,
That brandish claspèd levins. There I call
My memories, intolerably clad
In light the peaks of paradise may wear,
And lead the Armageddon of my dreams
Whose instant shout of triumph is become
Immensity's own music: for their feet
Are founded on innumerable worlds,
Remote in alien epochs, and their arms
Upraised, are columns potent to exalt
With ease ineffable the countless thrones
Of all the gods that are or gods to be,
And bear the seats of Asmodai and Set
Above the seventh paradise.

>>19161445
>>19161449
From your other posts I've seen and can recall in poetry threads I could guess you wouldn't like Oppen and nothing I show you will change your mind. I haven't read anything by Donald Sidney Fryer (nor even heard of him) but I have read Clark Ashton Smith's long poem and wasn't impressed. Though it isn't an epic per say, there are dozens of long American poems that are better, and what I would actually describe as 'American Epics,' rather than w/e Smith desires to imitate (and in my opinion, fails). Frank Stanford's likely being the best (again, written after 50s).

The only other work I would really suggest you personally after 50s is John Berryman's Dream Songs.

>>19160954
>no truly "far left" author can produce good literature
>george orwell
>dorothy parker
>tillie olson
>elliot perlman
>jean-paul sartre
angry_frog.png

>>19161536
Everyone you listed is literally infantile. It has absolutely nothing to do with their politics either, but their politics is an expression of their shit work.

>>19161536
None of those were proles mate. None of them could have been far left.

>>19160899
But we have no good literature anymore. The Fascist 'good literature' from a hundred years ago is better than anything today.

>>19161659
If you think about it, all literature is Fascist literature. Art is a type of domination.

>>19161696
wtf does that even mean?

>>19161728
All art is propaganda.

>>19161738
Refuted.

>>19160940
if you accept Harold Bloom's "four greatest living authors" of Pynchon, DeLillo, McCarthy and Roth, then there were great books through the 70s, 80s, 90s and even 2000s

>>19161743
Lol, Tolstoy's work fits even to the original definition of propaganda seeing that he is a Christian. His "What Is Art?" [Which was awful] is filled with his moralisms. Literally propaganda.

>>19161762
If His word is heard through art it cannot be propaganda.

>>19160899
because ww2 gave academia an excuse to purge true right-wing ideas after ww2 right-wing was hijacked by Americans who were never truly right-wingers, all they cared about was money and not culture at all so left-wing ideas grew up without any opposition.

>>19161765
>Propaganda is a modern Latin word, ablative singular feminine of the gerundive form of propagare, meaning 'to spread' or 'to propagate', thus propaganda means for that which is to be propagated.[3] Originally this word derived from a new administrative body of the Catholic Church (congregation) created in 1622 as part of the Counter-Reformation, called the Congregatio de Propaganda Fide (Congregation for Propagating the Faith), or informally simply Propaganda.[2][4] Its activity was aimed at "propagating" the Catholic faith in non-Catholic countries.

>>19161223
yes and?

>>19161770
>etymology hunting
holy r*ddit

>>19161696
Pseud fart-sniffing.

>all literature is domination
>all domination is fascist
Retarded.

>>19161784
I'm not hunting, I already know it's etymology, and it still means the same thing today. You are just the idiot who thinks propaganda = lies

>>19161795
You don't have an argument. All art is a form of communication, read: domination via concept propagation. You have no artistic sense. I am not a pseud because I don't claim to be an intellectual, you don't understand what I'm saying because you are spiritually devoid and your art is probably shit.

>>19161799
>it still means the same thing today
when people talk about 'propaganda' they are talking about an administrative body of the Catholic church who supervise missionaries

>>19161812
What was Proust dominating when he wrote of homosexual french sissies?

>>19160899
Lefties today write fiction. Righties write books on economics and political discourse. There are similarly talented prose stylists between them.

>>19161745
He is correct about Roth, who holds up when compared with the last great batch of American writers. But the other three enjoy wasting time and saying nothing.

>>19161856
Different anon here. What are your favourite postwar books?

>>19161843
That's not what it meant even then you retard. It meant to "spread" or "propagate". Your reading skills are so poor that you failed to even recognize the definition of the word which was stated in the first sentence of the excerpt which I posted. Interacting with someone as much of a moron as you has actually ruined my mood. I will no longer be responding to any of your posts. I suggest you improve on your reading skills. Have a good day.
>>19161844
The French are so effeminate.

>>19161844
common decency

>>19160940
Bolaño, Ligotti, Sebald, David Foster Wallace

>>19161812
>All art is a form of communication,
Wrong.

>>19161885
Heidegger is a hack who only ever wrote for money. I will never read his work. It is probably shit.

>>19161891
You sound like a schizophrenic.

>>19161899
I mentally very healthy, and the company I keep regard me as quite pleasant.

>>19161536
>>george orwell
>dorothy parker
Kitsch
>jean-paul sartre
Mediocre literarily writer and a hack philosopher.

The thing about it is that no matter how proud leftists are for dominating cultural spaces at the moment, they can’t change (or even deny it if you challenge them on it directly) that the period in which they have been cultural stewards has been the most drastic period of cultural decline in all of human history. Leftists being in charge of the arts has done more harm to culture than plagues and the destruction of empires. It’s honestly astounding.

>>19161903
Try not looking at literature in terms of intellectual concepts, and just enjoy a nice story.

>>19161941
I don't, my post was about art.

>>19161945
You obviously do if you think Tolstoy's ultra-simple What is Art? was describing an unarguably Christian, which for you means propagandistic, conception of aesthetics.

>>19161856
Lol, Roth is by far the weakest of those four novelists

>>19160899
There is no particularly convincing right-wing movement today, though it's not like fascism wasn't revolutionary in its own sense. What would the Yeats and Pounds of today attach themselves to? Flaccid conservatism, or maybe fiercely anti-intellectual country-side nationalism?

>>19160899
A large part of literature of the last centuries is devoted to critique, whether it is cultural or aesthetical. Cultural critique in literature presents itself as an opposing position to mainstream culture, though the author not necessarily fully embraces this political position.

I would expect that along with the rise of liberalism and left-wing politics, a new generation of right-wing authors is born. This is not to be expected soon, however, as the most wealthy countries are extremely right-wing in their politics (even despite their exterior image some of them try to promote) and it is unlikely to change while we're alive.

>>19161923
Seems like a cope. You can't find a right-wing millionaire to be your patron? They certainly exist, but maybe they don't care, because they're a bunch of philistines. The Walton family are a bunch of Calvinists but go check the literature section of Walmart. It's like... pirate romance novels (and Amish romance).

If Republican billionaires enjoy their wealth, they sure as hell hide it well. As far as anyone can tell, these guys genuinely like working 18-hour days in offices and going to charity dinners -- and that's their fun. Or golfing. Which is the most boring game that has ever existed. But the conservative masses out there in America don't mind since if that's what he wants to do with his wealth, more power to him.

Art's just a reflection of reality though. If the left's art is an image of cultural decline, plagues and destruction of empires, then that is a reflection. I think it's time for art celebrating decline, plague and destruction of empires to be multiplied.

https://youtu.be/VRB0hU7qMZ4

>>19161856
This post says nothing.

>>19160899
>100% of the good literature we have today
There hasn't been a good book since The Road (2006)

>>19161423
Yeah, im coming to terms with this more and more. Art is niche.

>>19161963
"What is art" is not a story.

>>19161226
Based

>>19160899
Americans stop mistaking liberals for leftists for 5 minutes challenge.

>>19160899
Because right-wing anti-capitalism died after the second world war.
Pound was NOT a capitalist.
This is the answer. Ignore the others.

>>19160899
Depending on what you mean by right-wing, Vargas-Llosa is a rigth winger. He believes in social left-wing views (lgbt, abortion etc.) but is very pro-capitalism and anti-communism. He's also one of the best living novelist, probably the last truly major name of the Latin American moon who's still alive.

>>19162486
maybe 'leftists' should stop acting like liberals then

>>19162486
Let’s not pretend that today’s leftists are anything more than liberals with edgier rhetoric.

my favorite poem is by ee cummings, according to wiki he voted republican.

>According to his testimony in EIMI, Cummings had little interest in politics until his trip to the Soviet Union in 1931.[21] He subsequently shifted rightward on many political and social issues.[22] Despite his radical and bohemian public image, he was a Republican and later an ardent supporter of Joseph McCarthy.[23]
i carry your heart with me(i carry it in
my heart)i am never without it(anywhere
i go you go,my dear;and whatever is done
by only me is your doing,my darling)
i fear
no fate(for you are my fate,my sweet)i want
no world(for beautiful you are my world,my true)
and it’s you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you

here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;which grows
higher than soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart

i carry your heart(i carry it in my heart)

>>19162452
I know, and I said if you think Tolstoy's definition of art was propagandistic then you must look at any story under an equally narrow and un-artistic intellectual view.

>>19160899
There is no good literature today, left or right. We've reached the dregs of all culture.

>>19162421
>Art's just a reflection of reality though. If the left's art is an image of cultural decline, plagues and destruction of empires, then that is a reflection. I think it's time for art celebrating decline, plague and destruction of empires to be multiplied.
If they were celebrating that, it would be at least be something interesting. But that isn’t anywhere near what we see in the art of leftists today. What we’re stuck with is didactic garbage, depictions of the meanderings of new-yuppies, and sappy, second-rate imitations of James Baldwin’s third-rate novels.

Can you really get published and promoted if you're right wing? And im not talking about republicuck "right wingers" like Shapiro or Murray.
On the other hand literature as absurd as white fragility will be propagandized 24/7 regardless of merit just because it agrees with the flow

>>19160899
>good literature we have today
There's no good contemporary lit.
Also, Ezra described himself as left-wing (although I myself am suspicious of such a statement)
>>19160949
Unfortunate, but they shall be remembered as heros.

>>19163170
>Also, Ezra described himself as left-wing
>>19161033

>>19161226
>Right wing positions don't allow for creative thought. Being a right winger means you're against progress and intectualism. Not allowing for any sort of abstract or creative thought
You're right, i guess people like Dostoevsky, Nozick, Nietzsche, Cormac McCarthy, and countless others hated intellectualism and had no creative or abstract thought

>>19160899
The mind on strike.
>"directives/"mandates"
>supply chain issues and mass delays
>businesses forced to hire people of certain groups even if there is a marginal cost of merit
>mass firing of non-compliant working class
>propoganda from alphabet soup entities/"institutes"
You can hate her writing style or romance subplots, but her prognosis is becoming more accurate by the week/month.

>>19163220
I’m if I’d describe all of those people as right wing (I personally don’t think Nietzsche has a coherent set of politics), but I do think believing that creative thought can joy occur within the confines of intellectualism and today’s notions of “progress” is a clear indication of a rather stifled mind.

>>19161635
??? Georges Orwell was literally a miner then homeless for a while.

>>19163253
>Nietzsche has a coherent set of politics
You deserve your slavery, that's his politics.

>>19160899
We don't have good literature today.

>>19161226
>Being a right winger means you're against progress and intectualism
Refuted by the futurists.

>>19161696
based

>>19163272
nvm this is wrong. Still he was pretty close to the lower classes

>>19161770
Etymology =/= actual usage

>>19160899
There has never been a good written by someone leaning left

>>19162908
>He believes in social left-wing views (lgbt, abortion etc.) but is very pro-capitalism and anti-communism.
I'm the opposite. Socially right-wing but economically left (a bit of socialism is required).

>>19162908
Literally a self-described liberal. NOT right-wing.

>>19160899
the right ruined itself and went from aristocracy worship to money worship, no cultural traditions can survive that. the right is now just a collection of fat fools being manipulated by oil execs who wouldn’t care less about anything.

>>19163330
Mann, Kafka, and Tolstoy were great writers.
I’m not a fan of Joyce, Hemingway,mormWilde, but people on here seem to like them a lot.

>>19163344
>aristocracy worship
What do you mean by this? The worship of an actual aristocracy, or the worship of aristocratic ideals (whatever they may be)?

>>19163351
>Kafka
He wasn't left wing nor right wing.

>>19163344
Yes, the Left really has no care about money.

>>19163321
You are using it incorrectly.

>>19163369
He was a socialist. Don’t delude yourself because someone from the other side wrote something you like.

>>19163391
No, I'm not, that faggot is.

>>19161745
I've never heard Roth being recommended here, probably because he is Juden. Anything worth reading from him?

>>19163397
Kafka is not "from the other side" for me.

>>19163398
No you're using it incorrectly. Propaganda is just information. That is all.

>>19163437
Information is information. Propaganda has a different connotation. It's information meant to dissuade you, to convince you, to push particular ideas (particularly political ones). Not all information is like this.

>>19163437
(contd)
>Propaganda is a form of transmission of information that aims to influence the attitude of a community regarding some cause or position, presenting only one side or aspect of an argument

>>19163445
>Not all information is like this.
This is where you are wrong.

>>19163461
No. Propaganda is a type of information, it's not synonymous with information nor is it information itself.

>>19163476
Why do I have to use your wrong definition? I don't care how the rabble debased the meaning of the word. Propaganda means what I said it means because that is how I use the word.

>>19163484
You can create your own incorrect, postmodern definition but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to use it.

>>19163492
The way you use propaganda is 'incorrect' and 'postmodern'.

Has it occurred to you that a word can have multiple definitions?

>>19163523
Have you heard of context? Of connotation? Of usage? You're trying so hard to be le wicked akchyashually contrarian here and it's embarrassing to see.

>>19160899
There is virtually no good literature produced today. You don't see any right-leaning lit because zog suppresses it ruthlessly.

>>19160899
How do you write in support of the King, when kings no longer even seem possible?

pic, three conservative authors.

>>19163530
>Have you heard of context? Of connotation?
Have you? Dumb fucking idiot. The context in which I used the word 'propaganda' meant exactly that which I alluded to in this post >>19161770 and then you come sperging at me about 'actual usage' then when I tell you finally that words can have multiple meanings you become all retarded and then say "oh but muh connotations", yeah in the connotation of MY FUCKING POST that's what I'm clearly fucking saying you dumb fucking retard. Stop wasting my fucking time

>>19163560
>Ha! Gotcha! I'm using the fossilized etymology, not the actual usage in modern English!
You're beyond retarded. Seethe more btw.

>>19160899
>left politically
>pound
you gotta be fucking kidding me

>>19161033
kek

>>19165178
>browses literature board
>is illiterate
how surreal

It's almost as if (((certain left leaning people))) control the publishing industry.

>>19160899
I dont read anything written after ww1

>>19165724
Based. This is usually a very easy way to identify a good book. Although my limit is the end of WWII.

>>19161882
I like ligotti, haven’t much cared for Wallace nor sebald, bolano I will read eventually.

>>19160938
This but without the antisemitism

>>19160899
>>19160938
>>19160954
>>19160962
>>19163330
What are you guys talking about? The answer is very simple. Creativity is associated with left wing political beliefs. There's plenty of research on this. This makes sense, once you realise that both things are the widening of borders, the freeing up of associations, and taking risks, as opposed to conservatism, which is carefulness, the tightening and ordering of things.
>>19161738
Not Shakespeare.

>>19160899
>good literature
>today

>implying

>>19165748
>surveys
>"research"
loooool
furthermore, most revolutionary lit from the 20th century came from political reactionaries, which makes your point even more delusional

>>19165748
This has been refuted as the pseudo-science it is.

>>19160899
Becasue right leaning authors get censored and cancelled
Just donating money, like the Five Nights at Freddys dev, can end your career. Its the french revolution all over again, if youre openly right those people want to behead you

Also Michell Houlbecque is right leaning

>>19162421
I dunno m8 cope or not mother fucker has a solid point. This is the worst degradation of Western Society outside of the fall of the classical into the medieval/dark ages. And who controls the cultural narrative and spaces?

>>19160907
The culture finished shifting left in the 70s

>>19163408
Sabbath's Theater. The Ghost Writer is great, too.

>>19162486
Congrats on falling for Marxist revisionism. Liberalism has been "the left" for as long as the left-right political dichotomy has existed.

>>19165867
The high Montagnards were Roux mate, not fucking Marat.

WHEN ADAM DELVÉD AND EVÉ SPANNÉ WHO WAS THEN A GENTLEMANNÉ?

>>19160899
>of the good
Neoliberal global capital has to have a priest class, many priest classes.

>>19160907
>culture shifted
Culture left--

>>19161923
In Orwell's defense, his essays are worthwhile

>>19163344
>went from aristocracy worship to money worship
The crypto-Loyalist Anglophile 5th column in America is firmly in the driving seat, since at least Teddy Roosevelt

>>19160899
Well, if you're talking about American writers, it's no wonder.

The republican party has become a shitfest of paranoid schizzos who refutes blatant facts, and politicize shit that is not up for debate.

Although, the Identity Politics addicted left is not a good choice, it is the only choice unless you want to hang with violently mentally ill people.

>>19160899
real life has a liberal bias

>>19165820
>This is the worst degradation of Western Society

just because women won't suck your dick?

>>19161882
>four dead white men
gee I wonder what I can hope to find in their writing

>>19162421
>Art's just a reflection of reality though

typical nazi midwit nonsense. You people are so weak willed you feel the need to go along with whatever's presented in front of your face.

>>19161923
>they can’t change (or even deny it if you challenge them on it directly) that the period in which they have been cultural stewards has been the most drastic period of cultural decline in all of human history.
Under the auspice of free market capitalism, retard. Leftists are stewards because consumers want the art they make. That's it. Stop hating freedom.

>>19162421
The people you are talking about are too far left-wing to appreciate art. They are puritans.

>>19162449
>>19161423
Same
Music is the only artform friendly to the lower classes

>>19169046
fucking hate lefties so GD much

>>19169092
Explain.

>>19169100
explain deez nuts

>>19169148
Tedious newfag.

>>19163411
>Kafka is not "from the other side" for me.
O Being from the Outside, I bow.

>>19169167
retarded commie

>>19169211
Alright, let's stop and give each other a chance. What is on those posts you quoted that you find disagreeable?
I'm not a communist, if that helps.. Not even in the US sense of the word.

>>19169234
think about it

the right aren't interested in creating, only destryoing

>>19169258
all extremists must hang only a sith deals in absolutes

>>19165820
ok man, you're being a little hysterical here. you should probably log off for a bit.

>>19169258
>implying destruction isn’t a creative act

>>19160920
/thread

>>19165739
reading order is the savage detectives -> 2666

>>19168902
>SEX SEX SEX NEED IT NOW NEED IT ALWAYS SEX DEFINES MY LIFE AND YOURS TOO
Lol.

>Aren't all artist 'fascists' - at least if they're interesting - which is why they should never be allowed anywhere near political power. The same is true, in a more Stalinist/depressing way, of all intellectuals - best just to shoot the mofos.

>>19160954
Good take until the very end.

>>19169638
>>SEX SEX SEX NEED IT NOW NEED IT ALWAYS SEX DEFINES MY LIFE AND YOURS TOO

kek

>>19169638
>>19169738
Sex is just another addictive drug like heroin or tobacco. However this chemical is produced by your body and you have no choice about starting it. At least it isn't physically addictive like food.

>>19161423
Yeah, that’s why the bourgeoisie is based

>>19169258
lol imagine being this retarded. the right destroys specifically in order to rebuild with new and glorious splendor

>>19169258
Destroying seems pretty good for art though.

>>19161423
True, only the artistic bourgeoisie had the qualities needed to elevate itself from the rest of the working class and take for itself the millenary powers of throne and altar. Sub-80 IQ factory workers, ie failed farmers, could never.

>>19160899

>Why is it that almost 100% of the good literature we have today comes from people leaning left politically?

Name one example of "good literature" from a contemporary left leaning person. Most good literature and all great literature is fashy.

>>19170884
bolano, if he counts as contemporary

>>19160954
>most vital "right-wing" movement
>founded by marxists and/or ex-marxists
>right wing

>>19170884
Knausgard (he's a lib in the closet)

>>19162908
>he is right-wing but actually doesn't support any right-wing idea

>>19168902
>“'We have invented happiness' say the last men, and they blink'.

>>19161226
I know this is bait but it's simply not true:
>Wagner
>Waugh
>Tolkien
>Pound
>Borges
>Dali
>The Furturists
It's actually kind of an interesting discussion that doesn't need your derailment.

>>19161437
>George Oppen, who is probably the best American poet of the 20th century
Brave words

>>19171392
nah Knausagaard is a closeted right winger

>>19160899
none of you retards have even read literature that has come out today why are you even getting mad about this

All your favorite authors are gay and left-wing. Keep coping, /pol/tards.

>>19172505

>>19160899
None of it is good though

>>19160940
Jesus, you're like the only good Tripfag on this site.

>>19162378
Roth relies on the substance of his content to convey his point and does so in tightly controlled and succinct novels. There's no showmanship, which is what modern writers rely upon today. The other three rely on rambling prose styles. The last batch of great Americans were the Lost Gen, whose reputation for changing literature via their style eclipses the fact that they still penetrated the human spirit. DeLillo's rambling about supermarkets in White Noise and Pynchon's octopus fight scenes intermingled with Slothrop's nuclear erection are completely vacuous next to their forebears. In the case of McCarthy it's a shame because he began as a fantastic novelist, then around the time of All the Pretty Horses he cashed in and started writing the trash that is Blood Meridian, No Country and The Road. Open any random page of Blood Meridian and compare it to one in Suttree or Orchard Keepet and you will note the difference.
>>19162425
My post clearly states that Roth is a superior writer to the three contemporaries. It's okay if you miss this. Look at you being dumb.

>>19172974
You are a dumb retard because you don't even know that BM came before Atph and was by far his worst selling and least reader friendly book. Get a clue before you spew shit dumbass.

>>19172994
My mistake. In that case, Blood Meridian led to the terrible All the Pretty Horses, but being that they're both poorly written books with no isolated passages worthy of praise I'll maintain that he started strong and turned poor, and that Roth, maintaining his quality across a career, remains the superior writer. Mind you, I'm not a huge Roth fan, but of the four offered up by Bloom he's easily the best, as he is the only one whose writing strives to encapsulate the essence of the idea versus capitulating to pursuit of an ugly, rambling prose style. Which is, supposedly, a trait of American writers. Also try not being such a histrionic woman next time, you weepy faggot.

>>19173036
>they're both poorly written books with no isolated passages worthy of praise
Giant kek.
>try not being such a histrionic woman next time, you weepy faggot
Shut the fuck up, contrarian faggot. You fucked up because you have zero idea what you are talking about. It is so easy to tell.

>>19173062
Feel free to grab your nearby copy of Blood Meridian and post an excerpt. It won't stand.
>Shut the fuck up, contrarian faggot.
There you go writhing with estrogen again.
>zero idea what you're talking about
I've read every novel I've mentioned, reading All the Pretty Horses and The Crossing prior to Blood Meridian. I was mistaken in their order of publication but I did not care to check the chronology beforehand nor does it contradict what I said about McCarthy being a better writer at the start. What books of these writers have you actually read, little girl?

>>19173084
Not wasting time with you. You have not read a thing. You are so dumb, you can't even fake it on an anonymous forum kek.

>>19173099
>Not wasting time with you
You've tried, there's just no opening because you're too stupid and poorly read to defend McCarthy with any passion. That's all right. Have a good one, little crybaby bitch.

>>19171670
lmao, it do be like that though

>>19173117
I don't need to. You are not even worth countering. Some people are so dumb that their stupidity is readily obvious the moment they post, you are one of those. Anybody who read those books is probably laughing at your stupid attempts. I definitely am.

>>19173125
>Not wasting time with you
>Please slap me around more daddy
Huh, look at that. An actual woman on 4chan.
>Anybody who read those books
Being me, possibly some other anons; and not you.
>Laughing at your stupid attempts. I definitely am.
The aches in your vagina seem to stem from McCarthy alone. I liked Gravity's Rainbow, Lot49, White Noise, Libra, Suttree. There's another thread currently discussing Thomas Wolfe. I liked Look Homeward, Angel, but would say if asked that it was the style over substance product of a megalomaniac who is easily outdone by the less flashy yet aesthetically superior Hemingway. And that's how I see Roth in comparison with the other three. Read him sometime and form an opinion free of the one /lit/'s given you.

>>19173148
Push harder newfag. Little baby is hurt at the namecalling and is throwing a tantrum, kek. Fake it till you make it. Good to-read list btw

>>19173148
Reading the blurb =/= reading the books

>>19173153
Oh! I get it now. You're stupid but need to get in the last word. All right, have a good one.

>>19173169
No need for the last word, your posts are bigger insults to you than whatever I have said. Thanks for that I guess.
And unlike your fake pretending ass I have even read The Orchard Keeper and can't stop laughing at your retarded attempts ITT. Thanks for that too.

>>19160899
because the right has nothing to complain about today other than tfw no gf. They need a war or some shit

>>19170884
>Houellebecq
>good
you could've picked McCarthy for fuck's sake

>>19161891
you sound like a retard pseud

>>19160899
>good literature
Pound single-handedly created the Modern movement in literature all you trad morons cry about 24/7

>>19160907
>"the culture shifted left"
the people who have all the money made it that way dum dum

they want people infantile and so to be fit to embrace values like "we're all equal" over and above anything resembling "virtue," which is scoffed at

>>19163387
that's because the "right" and "left" today are nearly indistinguishable. The right today are convervatards, the rest are nazis. Convervatives are just milder leftist liberals by pre-ww2 standards. They are equally as materialistic

>>19173936
I’ve always been as “reject the contemporary/ mass culture, and return to experimental modernism (except Joyce and Picasso)” type. Trad Parker’s just want to replace the current mass culture with one they fond more appealing.

Lmao lefturds getting BTFO yet again, no wonder they need their oligarch billionaire controllers to censor internet wrongthink

>>19174120
Yes, they use leftism as a controlled poison to bring down society. Lefturds will cry all day about muh CIA infiltration but will never recognise this.

>>19160899
The publishing houses are owned by jews and media dictates what literature goes mainstream. We all know who owns the media, don't we Elon?

>>19160899
Because right wing politics is inherently anti-intellectual in its mass-appeal

>>19172505
>All your favorite authors are gay and fascists.
fixed

>>19163223
Rand is based.
let the tards seethe

>>19162486
American Liberals are leftists.

>>19175642
>American leftists are liberals.
fixed

>>19160938
Noo my heckin good boy Nazirinos need to say racial slurs on Facebook without repercussions

>>19173936
Pound was a fascist

>>19161885
This.
Art arts its arting.

>>19161728
The latest youtube/twitter sensation seems cool and post-ironically edgy.

>>19161891
FUCK YOU

>>19160899
>the only people with enough free time to write are trust fund kids or similar
>people that have never had to work for a living have naive ideas about the world
That’s it.

Some people here don't see the forest for the trees. Don't just focus on literature, also ask yourself the following:

How much great architecture is being created nowadays?
How much great music? Great paintings? Great sculptures?

The answer to all of the above is "not much, if anything at all". Now why is that?

lol imagine leftist retards itt taking """""credit""""", feeling like they're """"""winning""""" for the "left wing" culture that dominates today, acting like this wasn't the conscious intentions of billionaires. the only thing it's convincing people to do is become infantilized enough to demand total government control of society, even though that same government is controlled by the global capitalist class.
non-mainstream righty is at least smart enough to realize that the rich aren't the friend of the masses, even if it's only intuitively believing in "conspiracy theories". now take your vaccine dum dum, they are culling the herd so it's your time to go

>>19161033
>fascism was left wing.
Behold, the American education system

>>19177788
>>19177944
These. Dubs confirm.

>>19160899
>implying good literature exists today

It's an interesting question. I don't know if I have a good answer, but I've given it some thought.

Contemporary critical culture values literature and art that deconstructs. Throughout the later half of the 20th century at least, a left-wing ethos has been much more effective at providing that deconstruction—certainly in the capitalist west.

Right-wing and left-wing philosophies are fascinating in their own right from a psycho-social standpoint, and I don't know that I've seen anyone really pin down the essence of either flawlessly. But what I will say is that to be right-wing in today's society demands a level of reference toward institutions/ideas that have been in control or been defended for centuries, and it demands some level of emotional unsentimentality toward certain issues. It makes it very hard to make conservative art that feels fresh or moving—or did; society is changing.

There's also the clear fact that the intelligentsia and cultural gatekeepers have learned left socially for a while now, but I think these things feed into each other

>>19178664
>best piece of right-wing art
Most of the great literature written before the XX century was extreme right wing by modern standards.

>>19178695
I agree, and I also think the vast majority of visual art (paintings and sculptures) would be right-wing if you had to classify it. But forms like the novel and the film lend themselves to a level of introspection that leans left

>>19160899
Like what? Ready Player One?

>>19177788
correct subhuman Americans can't get past petty sports ball divisions of my team is better than yours

>220 posts
>not a single suggestion of a decent book written post- 9/11

Doomed

>>19161882
Only Sebald is good out of those

>>19161033
this is your brain on American propaganda

*comes to the thread*
>BRAAAAP
>PRUUT
*shits*
*leaves the thread*

>>19171548
All of those guys are shit.

>>19178711
>lend themselves to a level of introspection that leans left
What do you mean by this? That only leftists "feel" about things?

>>19178440
>>19179147
Fascism did literally everything the left did on other countries. Expropriations under the pretense of MUH WORGERS, suppression of the opposition, had conveniently nebulous ideas the party could interpret to their convenience, planned economies, kitsch patriotism, cults of personality, etc.
I don't know how you forget that in most of the 20th century fascist and communist dictators were indistinguishable and that communist parties, for all their lip service to now libshit ideas, weren't queer POC communes with daily gay parades.

>>19160899
rightoids are obsessed with violence and homosexuality, don't the time or intelligence to commit to art

>>19180847
ok dum dum take your vaccine

>>19180850
uh oh righty is mad! watch out or he'll kill and rape you!

I don't think I ever read a single good book from a socialist/commie author

>>19162421
>doesn't appreciate golf
Filtered

>>19165748
>the freeing up of associations
Black people have been getting shoehorned in to everything lately, typically as the heroes or protagonists. This would be your freeing of associations. Why were they never associated with altruism or heroicness before? A racist would admit that chinese are/were hard workers or that native americans do have a knack for the outdoors. But blacks never were afforded any positive stereotypes. Were they that oppressed? Are they just terrible all around?

>>19178440
>>19179147
>>The fact is that as a young man Mussolini accepted all the essential theoretical and interpretive propositions of Marx. His published writings between 1902 and 1914 contain innumerable references to Marx and only seven allusions to Babeuf and eight to Proudhon. Both his published writings and what we can reconstruct of his reading during this period indicate a preoccupation with the ideas of Marx that far exceeds any concern he had for other thinkers. Mussolini's point of departure was unquestionably Marx. No adequate reconstruction of his thought is possible if that fixed point is neglected. Not only was he a convinced Marxist, he was a knowledgeable one as well. His published writings contain regular references to the works of Marx and Engels. He specifically refers to every major piece of Marx's published writings available at that time. He alludes to Marx's writings in the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, the "Theses on Feuerbach," "Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right," A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, The Class Struggles in France, as well as Capital and the Communist Manifesto. In a number of places he not only alludes to The Poverty of Philosophy, but provides extensive quotations as well. He also provides quotations from the Contributions to the Critique of Political Economy, the Marx-Engels correspondence, Marx's articles in the New York Tribune, and the Communist Manifesto. There are references to Engels' The Conditions of the Working Class in England in 1845, quotations from the Anti-Duhring, and Engels' famous introduction to Marx's Class Struggles in France. He was not only familiar with the most important Marxist authors of the period, including Karl Kautsky and Wilhelm Liebknecht, some of whose work he translated, but he had read the works of theoreticians such as G. Plekhanov and Rosa Luxemburg, and Marx critics such as Werner Sombart. ... Whatever one thinks of his Marxism today, Mussolini was accepted by his socialist peers as a Marxist theoretician. He rose to leadership in the Italian Socialist Party at least in part on the basis of his recognized capacity as a socialist intellectual.

>The worker who fulfills his social duty with no other hope than a piece of bread and the health of his family repeats, on a daily basis, an act of heroism. Labourers are infinitely superior to all false prophets who pretend to represent them. These false prophets have an easy time of it due to the insensitivity of those who have the sacrosanct duty of taking care of labourers. It is for this reason that I was, and am, a socialist. The accusation of inconsistency is without foundation. My behaviour has always been consistent in the sense of looking to the substance, not the appearance of things. As the natural development of society proved more and more of Marx's predictions to be wrong, true socialism retreated from the possible to the probable.
Dumb fucking uneducated idiots.

>>19160940
Ask that question here and you'll get recommended the same fucking books from 80 years ago. Lit is cringe

Bump

That is bullshit. Most people have a diverse set of opinions spanning the political left-right spectrum. If you classify as "leftist" everyone who has at least one progressive belief you will arrive at such a misguided conclusion.

>>19179030
Right, fights over sports games is purely an American event.

>>19180280
Debunked opinion

>>19182454
i wasn't talking about actual sports teams brainlet more the trap of side taking

>>19182699
Ah I get you. Even if I didn't dubs prove you right anways.

>>19178440
>>19179147
Behold, they have taken his bait.

>>19169258
Fuck you. I'm a leftie too, but this is a retarded opinion. The entire idea of art and artistry is inherently conservative and traditional. The "art" of something is training and cultivation of the methods of creating something. This is the same in literature, painting, architecture etc. Someone doesn't just slap some shit together and it becomes good, it has to have some modicum of form and style, or be a subversion of traditional forms and styles (thus in and of itself being based on them). Or do you believe that for example, religious art, which i assume your reddit-atheist mind associates with reactionary or conservative politics, is less worthy of "art" than, say, a painting of a green square. You can have your post-modern "innovative" art, what's the point of creating something if it sucks.

>>19163272
>>19163319
being poor doesn’t make one far left ffs

>>19163344
>t.undergradangst

>>19161226
>Because Right wing positions don't allow for creative thought. Being a right winger means you're against progress and intectualism. Not allowing for any sort of abstract or creative thought
- -lolwut??
if you paid for your education, you have grounds to sue