/lit/ - Literature

I can't stand looking at that cunt

>>3115488

Same. He's the least funny man on earth.

>>3115487
>Where does the ability to articulate both creatively and eloquently as well as the ability to make artful cultural references?
That question is incomplete OP. Where does it come from? Reside? Take us? How inarticulate.

>>3115492

he's standup isn't very good but he is arguab the number one contender for the best conversationist of his generation. name one conversationist better than him. more clever, more charismatic.

>>3115504
sorry i meant to say where does it come from

>>3115526

>name one conversationist better than him. more clever, more charismatic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAKV57mQuls

>>3115532

>goofy american who clumsily tells anecdotes which invariably involve laughing at something because of its appearance as less intelligent that you are

not OP but larry david is shit apart from curb and sienfeld

>>3115546

Larry David is the same on curb and in real life

>>3115487
Being relatively attractive is also important. Whether you like it or not, ugly people get ignored.

>>3115526
>sorry i meant to say where does it come from
It's practise. Ultimately, being articulate, eloquent, and make cultural references are decided by other people: it's no good making witty references to Star Wars if who you're talking to is a fantasy obsessed LoTR nut who refuses to know of SW on principle, neither is it any good making highly intellectual insights if they are not evident to the other person. In other words, as far as being well read or intelligent are concerned, you only have to be as much as who you're talking to. A lot of it is presentation and recognising the opportunities to be eloquent etc.

Also, being over confident is liable to make you come across as an idiot or arsehole as much as anything else, and charisma is more a side effect of being eloquent and all that, as well as taking an interest.

>>3115526
Stephen Fry

Do u think russell brand does drugs?

>>3115526
>name one conversationist better than him. more clever, more charismatic.

>>3115526
>name one conversationist better than him.
Louis Theroux.

Did OP just click on every word and look for a synonym. I mean seriously:
>I think these are the integral component parts that, together, engender this ability

>>3115563

very funny

>>3115561
stephen fry only fulfills a few of those requisite qualities, albeit EXCEPTIONALLY welll. he is primarily an intellectual and, consequently, is far less versatile than russell brand

>>3115656
>he is primarily an intellectual and, consequently, is far less versatile than russell brand

What bullshit. He's an erudite person who can talk about everything from apple computers to Wilde to darts (which is his favourite sport). Given a choice, I'd rather be trapped in a lift all day with stephen fry than with that burned out smackhead for an hour.

>>3115681
>He's an erudite person who can talk about everything
So long as the QI Elves write it on a cue card beforehand. And even then it's only in terms of factoids that lack profundity or insight.

>>3115687

Whatevs, dude. Believe what you want. If you think a manbaby who's most famous for sticking his cock in women and needles in himself is the more interesting person then that's cool with me. It's a pretty futile argument anyway.

>>3115681
saying you'd prefer that doesn't validate your point. stephen fry is somewhat dextrous but he brings an unwanted intellectual air to the most trivial matters. he is still an excellent person though

>>3115688
Knowing full well that much of Fry's appearance of intelligence is smoke and mirrors isn't the same as thinking the twat in the OP is better. The best Brand can aspire to is sometimes showing a modicum of these same attributes, which only seems amazing compared to his usual mindless twattery.

>>3115697
we are not questioning whether Brand is smarter than Fry. we are talking about social versaility which, unquestionabiltiy, Brand is more adept in.

>>3115565
he can hardly formulate a sentence without a 20 second forethought of silence. also, he doesnt possess most of the qualities we werre talking about

Not just well read. That isn't cultured in anything by the literature subculture. You ought to be scientifically literate, to have listened to plenty of great classical and pop music, watched tons of movies, a select few T.V comedies and T.V shows, seen the classics of western art, and lastly you should be up on current events.

>>3115768
this isn't correct

Brand is not intelligent/. Listen to what he says, he uses 'big words' for the sake of using them, and half the time get's the meaning wrong.

Where do you get the impression that he is well read? I remember in some documentary him staring blankly when some academic quoted "Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all. Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know". It was all rather embarrassing. I get the impression he has barely read more than the Beats.

>>3115872
not expressing superficial comprehension at some tawdry quote

>>3115884
>forgetting le meme arrow
>2012
>XD

>>3115884
But he had literally never heard it which is quite an achievement! I used to listen to his podcast, he is clearly very quick but i never got the impression of someone very knowledgeable or "cultured".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfNQ5q4_D2g&feature=related

have you seen this OP. he isn't as smart as Stephen fry but his charisma is unmatched

>>3115890
his podcast is better than anything i've ever listned to. it makes peter cook feel boring

>>3115922
bloody hell do people actually like other people who behave like that? what a fucking obnoxious tryhard.

>>3115922
This is the first time I've even heard of this guy, and this video doesn't make me altogether keen on learning more about him. He got more and more obnoxious as it went on.

>>3115856

This. Half his vocabulary consists of word he found in "Ye Olde English Dictionary 1803" that he thinks sound quirky and eccentric. He's a tryhard faggot who should have offed himself years ago in a Heroin-fuelled haze.

drugs are for losers op

>>3116237

Just because some people on drugs are losers doesn't mean that everyone on drugs is.

>>3115681

If I could choose someone from QI to be stuck in a lift with, I'd go for Ronnie Ancona.

>>3116237
this is true

t. drug addict

>>3115975

I thought he came across well in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BNNMpkM8AE

Oh wow, a Russell Brand fan. Now I've seen everything.

i hate his pseudo-spiritual crap. he can be amusing when he's hitting on chicks and joking about how tiny his penis is, but in "serious mode" he's a total bore.

>>3116300
this. i think he is quite a clever guy but the whole "we are all one thing" is a rouse

>>3116297
sounds like preoardained things to say

>>3115746
>we are talking about social versaility which, unquestionabiltiy, Brand is more adept in.
Only when it comes to hambeasts and Katy Perry.

>>3117731
what is a hambeast?

>>3115526
>name one conversationist better than him
>a man literally no-one can stand in any way, shape or form
>good conversationalist
Nag

>>3115760
Have you seen a Louis Theroux documentary ever? The man can talk with anyone, even ask the most difficult kind of questions and still be likeable to all sorts of people. I have never seen him need more than 2 seconds to "formulate" a question, nevermind 20.

>>3117784
he is not even a worthy contender. his interpersonal skills are nothing worthy of remark

>>3115760
>>3117834

I think you really need to stand back and evaluate just what you think you're saying.

>>3117834
>his interpersonal skills are nothing worthy of remark
Between Russel Brand, Stephen Fry and Louis Theroux, he by far has the best interpersonal skills. Both Brand and Fry come across as condescending to many, and have famously upset many people by just being who they are. Theroux can and has talked to anyone without upsetting them, he wouldn't be able to do gonzo style journalism if his interpersonal skills weren't up to it.

>>3117936
the fact that louie theroux is the only one of the three who isn't a massive twat is definitely a point in his favour.

>>3117936
he is a fucking idiot. when you're watching him and he's talking a controversial issue or taboo he only covers 1% of what you want him to attack them about. he's not at all articulate and can scarcely formulate a strong repudiation to any of the people he goes after