/lit/ - Literature

iu major in ak47
you want to make a joke dumbass

yes

Yes. Yes, it fucking was.

>>1926304

...the fuck?

yes
go finance
if only I went with an economy major I wouldn't have to suck cock to buy my coke now.

hahaha NOPE
I enjoy reading but not nearly as much as I enjoy having the money to buy a fancy shelf for my books.

the english faculty at universities isn't really a good place to learn literature, funnily enough.

all you learn is ideology; post-modernism, feminism, queer theory, deconstructionist bullshit... with some literature on the side.

>>1926319
go ahead fuck o
idiot bitch
see what happens

nah reading is fun, studying it is not.

>>1926338
you know how many entry level brokers are sucking their boss' dick for coke/coke money?

university degrees are mostly the same, you'll end up sucking cock unless you're already connected to the elites

I'll end up as a teacher. And I have no debt from undergrad.

Not a bad deal, but I'll never be a rich man.

English major here!

It honestly depends on what you see yourself doing with an English degree, and the universities requirements. A lot of people go into English because it is easy or enjoyable, but have no career path cut for them because they did not think of that. For this reason, there is the joke about how an English degree can get you a job at any restaurant you want.

My advice, double it up with a major or two, and have some pretty defined goals. In my case, I am Creative Writing English with a minor in teaching and linguistics. I plan on teaching abroad, and going for higher forms of education so that I may become a professor once I have myself properly accredited. There is more to it than that but this is my summary.

>tl;dr: Have a clear cut career goal and double up with some minors or a double major!

>>1926366
You learn "idelogy" so you can criticize literature within that framework.

I was going to until I realized Psychology was much more viable in America with this sort of environment.
>MFW I get a Master's in 4 years and get to listen to people bitch about their lives for cash

>>1926416
yeah, criticise it from a homosexual's standpoint (queer theory)

it'd be funny if it wasn't so stupid.

Both parents majored in English.

Mother: full-time schoolteacher, lower middle class, but enjoys the work.

Father: full-time investigative journalist. Enjoys the work, but is a whiney liberal constantly bitching about those mean conservatives and their social injustice. Not sure if that's the product of his education indoctrinating him to liberal ideas.

Did someone call for me?

>>1926524
Apparently neither of them taught you that rumors of "liberal indoctrination" and other such conspiracy theories are nonsense.

>>1926547
>feminism
>queer theory
>marxism
>literary theory

Why don't they teach 'christian' or any other non-lefty literary interpretation, just leftwing crap?

Maybe because they only want to teach their students left-wing ideology. Some people might call that indoctrination.

>>1926562
>christian
>right-wing ideology

Officially 0/10. A good chunk of my professors were conservative. As for your list, nothing besides marxism is left-leaning. And, despite the fact that your claim that Christianity is a right-wing ideology is horseshit, I've had priests teach courses at my college, which is not a religious one.

>>1926586

>implying Feminism isn't inherently associated with liberalism

Why do you think most Feminists vote for left-wing political parties such as Democrats and Green party?

>>1926586
queer theory and feminism are left wing, stupid.

>>1926591
I guess equal rights for all citizens is a liberal ideal. Good to know you'd prefer women to not vote, or think that their having equal rights has a "leftist" slant. Would you like to make any confessions about your feelings regarding black folk?

I'm majoring in Kicking Ass and Chewing Bubble Gum.
My thesis paper will be on And I'm All Outta Gum.

>>1926280

Worth looking at:
http://englishcomplit.unc.edu/english/undergrad/careers

>>1926595

Queers can be of any political orientation, and I don't have a problem with gays, I dabbled in their lifestyle a little myself as a teen (in retrospect mostly just for shock value and attention), but gay marriage is unconstitutional. The constitution defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Period.

Minored in English, majored in Film -- to be honest, I probably got my job doctoring scripts at UA precisely because I have the English Minor. Hopefully I can claw up to something better.

>>1926612
Right...

The idea that homosexuality should be permitted is a liberal idea. Ergo, it is liberal. Same with feminism.

I see you've already been indoctrinated, so maybe you're beyond help.

>>1926599

Equal rights is one thing. We already have equal rights. Modern "feminism" is about legalizing the murder of human lives (abortion), and encouraging public immodesty and overly sexualized behaviors. Most "feminists" try to justify women committing crimes because it is a reaction against a "male dominated" society. Like the woman who cut her husband's penis off because he wanted to divorce her. Feminists will claim she was "standing up for her rights." Feminism is an extreme leftist ideology that is creating a form of women's entitlement culture. Most modern "feminists" are 20 year old girls whose entire view of "feminism" comes from something they saw in a Lady Gaga video. It is also about being insanely angry and full of rage at men.

>>1926516
It'd be funny if I wanted to hear what another male WASP had to say too.

>>1926524

>invesigate journalist

That's pretty cool, for where does he write?

>>1926630
enjoy your atheist lesbian niggers then.

even though they've never produced a single item of note in literature.

>>1926612
If the Constitution defines marriage as between one man and one woman, why was it necessary to pass the Defense of Marriage Act?

>>1926635

>Atheists = Richard Dawkins, Phillip Pullman, David Hume

>Lesbians = Willa Cather, Sappho

>Blacks = Maya Angelou, Booker T. Washington, Octavia Butler, Alice Walker, Malcolm X

Yeah, these groups "never contributed anything to literature." Enjoy your trolling.

I'm a translator. I work roughly 40 hours a week, and make 2,500€ give or take per month (it can shot upwards or go downwards). But of course, I'm French.

>>1926631
>we already have equal rights

No, no we don't. Good try, though. Still astounding when people think that cultural attitudes and policies have completely disappeared less than 100 years after they were legally in place.

Saging for all the fascist nonsense in this thread. Economic conservatism I can understand. Civil conservatism and conservative ideologies, however, have no basis in science or reality.

>>1926643
>malcom x
>richard dawkins
>literature

Hahahahahahaha.jpg

>>1926599

Traditionally that was exactly what liberalism was about.

Have you ever looked into the history of the liberal/conservative divide and its emergence in the 19th century?

The center of the divide has shifted to the liberal side quite a bit since -- you don't see many literal monarchists these days -- but that doesn't stop such movements as feminism from being quite liberal in nature.

Such concepts as that women should be allowed to vote are no longer exclusive to the feminist label -- they've become a integral part of society by this point. As such idealogies like feminism tend to seek out "new frontiers," so-to-speak, to champion. The first wave of feminism was primarily concerned with womens' suffrage, but now that dream has been reached, it's no longer such a defining aspect of the ideology.

It's my belief that as long as an ideology is something that people can or will use to define themselves as a person, then that ideology will continue to morph and mutate and change as much as it can to in order to remain relevant to society. Today's feminists by and large concern themselves with entirely different political and societal issues than yesterday's did.

Still not sure how anything I just said was relevant to the conversation, though.

>>1926643
never heard of your niggers of lesbians, and doubt they re on any top 100 lists

Things you can do as an English major:

Write books, newspapers, magazines, scripts and promotional materials

Edit books, newspapers, magazines, scripts and promotional materials

Both private and state employers have need of people to fulfill these tasks.

>>1926643
I'm on your side in this but you chose such an awful group for blacks.
No Ellison? Wright? Baldwin? Aime Cesaire? Langston Hughes?

>>1926643
>Willa Cather
>Lesbian

Say's who!?

>>1926654

I think that's an accurate observation. People are very attached to groups they identify with. There's a study that's fairly well known in social-psychology called the Robber's cave study. I won't have you take my word for it. Here's some summary from the Open Yale lecture on it:

>The study was, eleven- and 12-year-old boys at a camping program. These were well-adjusted, pretty rich kids, racially homogeneous, and they were put into separate cabins. And the cabins were given leaders and they gave themselves names. Being unimaginative boys, they called themselves "The Eagles" and "The Rattlers" but as--what happened was, being separated they developed distinctive cultures. And when these groups were set in competition against each other, the Eagles versus the Rattlers, the within-group intensity grew. The Eaglers began--Eagles began to care a lot more about other Eagles than about anybody else.

(http://oyc.yale.edu/yale/psychology/introduction-to-psychology/content/transcripts/transcript15.htm
l)

I think we have to be careful not to dismiss cogent criticism as MERE manifestations of group-identification, however. There's nothing that prevents the mutation of group causes from occurring in a way that's actually valid and constructive.

>>1926669

The only instance I can recall of a such an ideology ceasing to be relevant overnight is abolitionism, and it's easy to see why that died.

Not much it can do to remain relevant to society after all the slaves are free.

>>1926675
I think abolitionism was really more of a cause, in the class of suffrage, than an actual ideology. It was, at the time, affiliated with State vs Fed. You could also argue it was the "First Wave" cause of civil rights.

UK English major here. The there are definitely editorial/proofreader/writer dream tier jobs, except the real kicker is that somecunt put them all down South.
Ungoodly doublegay horsewank.

>>1926700
>horsewank

Your British is showing

>>1926701
>UK English major here.
>Your British is showing
Who would have thought?!

>>1926705

But seriously, did you write that just to "act British" or did that feel as natural as you'd like me to believe?

>>1926710
...I swore like that as it comes naturally. Just how British you thought I was, whoever the buggeryfuck you are, was the furthest thought from my mind.

>>1926769
>buggeryfuck

>>1926710
'wank' is an extremely common british swear word. more common than 'bloody'.
also same with australia.

>>1926700
That's the problem with this stupid country, all the non shit tier jobs seem to be in THAT LONDON.

>>1926612
Are you saying is that everything in the constitution is right and that any amendment is unjustified?

English major here.
Double degree with Computer Science.
>mfw I will have a job sitting a cube hating the rest of my life.
Just kidding. I wants to make vidyas.

>>1926650
>He's never read Malcolm X's godly Autobiography
>He doesn't know that Dawkins invented the term "meme" and that Dawkins was well-known in the science literature world even before he was Mr. Edgy Atheist.

Get the fuck out.

Journalism major, here. Feels good going to a small school whose Journalism department is headed by a badass former investigative journalist who covered drug trade and gang wars in Jamaica and who uses his connections to get students internships in national televised media.

inb4: "herp derp jrnulizm sux cuz u won't git a jobs"

I don't give a fuck. His former students work with CBS news and shit.

BALLER LEAGUE

Switched from English to International Affairs.

Now I'm learning about economics, history, politics, philosophy, urban planning and geography instead of re-reading several books I've already read at home.

>>1926801
No, you.

Dawkins isn't literature, just a cunt.

>>1926863

>Dawkins isn't literature, just a cunt.

Blasphemy!

>>1926791

The constitution was established to protect America from tyranny. Tampering with our basic rights, especially the amendments our country was founded on, is saying that the lawmakers and the politicians can do whatever the fuck they want. Abandoning, butchering and raping the constitution is the first step to Fascism.

>>1926836
you will be nothing to anybody.
your post reeks of the person you are.

>>1927054
The people who created those amendments in the first place were lawmakers.

Your obsession with the Founding Fathers and viewing the Constitution as an infallible, inerrant document is on par with religious fundamentalism. Times change, the law changes with it. I'm guessing you also think the Founding Fathers were conservatives, too.

editor. been editing. it's my true love so i'm in heaven.

I wanted to major in English but I'm not sure I want to make a career out of it (if that's even possible), so I switched my major to biology and I made English literature my minor.

>>1927078

If anything the founding fathers were conservative libertarians. They believed in free speech, individual property rights, the right to bear arms etc.
These are exactly the kind of things that are being clipped away by people like you, who believe the constitution, which was designed to protect us from totalitarianism, no longer holds credence. America was fought on a war to liberate us from oppression and tyranny. We fought Fascism and Communism throughout a hundred years of our country's life. We defeated Communism and Fascism, and we fought against them because they stood in direct opposition to the constitutional liberties of American democracy. Our constitutional rights are slowly being eaten away and eradicated by politicians and a voting bloc who don't understand just how many rights and liberties we have compared to the rest of the world.
That is truly sickening.

>>1927111
>we defeated fascism and communism

Keep thinking America did those things. Glad to see the propaganda over there is working properly on suggestible little cretins like you. Not once did I say it no longer holds credence, but you insist on a false dichotomy of "all or nothing," just like the rest of your cancerous, self-involved ilk.

Keep painting yourself a hero of "freedom" while your country slips into classism that borders on slavery.

>>1927119

If anything it is your European propaganda that has taught you to be ungrateful for Americans liberating you from oppression.

As for "classism," classism is not an issue. I work hard for a living. I earn my keep. If someone else is too lazy to do that, then they deserve to be poor. No pity. Lazy, ungrateful layabouts don't deserve handouts. Otherwise they would be earning enough money to live on. Comparing that to "slavery" is bullshit.

>>1927128
Except your system is such that a person working full-time at your minimum wage cannot survive and would have to work around three full-time jobs to make ends meet. As per studies done in YOUR country, mind you.

Now go ahead and make some dismissive blanket statement about how it's their own fault that they don't get a better job. A society of millionaires cannot exist, and cannot function. So, why not be honest and admit that your political views are not championing individualism, but actually fully accept, promote and require a severely poor, exploited class to function properly.

The few held up on the backs of many. That isn't individualism, sir. Nor is it a viable, ethical economic policy.

There are a lot of people who jab on English for being a useless degree but if you're actually smart about what you take in school you can use it for something else. English teachers, especially at the grade or high school level, are pretty much guaranteed a job very quickly as most schools can pretty much get you a job automatically. It's also good for a Law degree or something in Library Sciences, editing, publishing, translation, or professional writing. That being said the stereotype of English majors being lazy hipsters is mostly true. 80% of any english program is going to be filled with smug lazy douchebags majoring in "creative writing" who mostly stay in school for extended periods of time to leech off of grants and scholarships. These people usually drop out once they get into actual intense English study (classics, literature theory, etc).

tl;dr: yes an English degree can get you a job. No it will not pay as good as something else. But if you were only interested in salary you would have buckled under the pressure of your parents and joined the army or majored in something in the business/medical field.

>>1927133

>that isn't individualism

Yes, it is. It is a system in which each individual is promoted or earns wages according to his or her own merit and his or her own blood, sweat and tears. People need to quit whining and begging and get to work. You are only poor if you CHOOSE to be poor.

This works far better than a system in which the government pokes its fingers in every day lives, like Fascism, Communism, or European socialism. Those are exactly the kinds of systems that Democracy was established in America to liberate us from. Excessive government control over individual lives should not be stood for by any American who knows and understands their rights. That was why it was disturbing that so many Americans voted for Mr. Nanny-State Barack Hussein Obama. That is tyranny. That is Fascism.

>>1927151
If you actually think America's version of capitalism is a meritocracy, you are delusional.

40% of the folks on the Forbes "Richest People" list qualified to be on said list from birth.

Inheritance and the existence of "old money" make the idea of a meritocracy a complete crock of shit. This is disregarding social connections, etc. Long story short, individualism doesn't exist because there is not one person who has made millions or billions independent of the help, cooperation and work of others. I'm pretty much done with this discussion because anyone that thinks a meritocracy exists in the modern world is living in some plane of reality that I can't even relate to.

>>1927151
You see, the problem with that, the truly horrifying thing about all of that is that you're wrong.

>You are only poor if you CHOOSE to be poor.

Of course! That explains why the vast majority of poor people had poor parents and grew up in shitty areas with substandard education and no ability to pay for better and so had no choice but to stay there!
Yes, being poor is actually SO MUCH FUN that this goes on for generations! It's not just within a single country either- there are whole countries who choose to remain poor! There's no way that history could have had anything to do with it.

You're absolutely right, a baby being born right now in a slum who will learn everything it knows from the world around it-world views, the wealth of opportunity which exists for him to get stabbed in the face for the small amount of money he has, attitudes towards education, education itself, everything. That baby has exactly the same prospects of becoming extremely wealthy as would Bill Gates's kids. Definitely. The only difference is that the children of the rich decide to work harder than the children of the poor and this is in no way influenced by their experiences. The opportunities open to them are identical. Shit school? Just move you retard! Can't afford university? Errr, get richer you dumb parasite!

Seriously though, it irritates me when people try to make individualism and freedom all about whether we should pay taxes or not. There's a lot more which influences the amount of control a person has over their own life than the amount of tax they pay.

Surely freedom is about having a meaningful choice about what to do with your life. If not then, please, tell me what IS important about freedom.

If all you want is for people to be rewarded entirely according to merit then fine but shouldn't that mean both removing the disadvantages which the poor start with AND the advantages which the rich start with?

>>1927190

>Yes, being poor is actually SO MUCH FUN that this goes on for generations!

It goes on for generations because of people that are too lazy and unmotivated to make a living for themselves.

>>1927308
You really do live in a fantasy land, don't you? No wonder most conservatives are religious.