/lit/ - Literature

Is it that the Oscars has become pointless/bullshit, or is it that modern cinema is really fucking shit?

>>4173107
Modern cinema is shit.

>>4173110

Almodovar is pretty good man.

>I only read old lit/classics/textbooks/philosophy

really? and yet here you are in /lit/ asking dumb fucking leading questions about a book you haven't read.

empty vessel go home pls

It is not very different from all other Nobel prizes. It's not bullshit and never was, but there is some bullshit to it and there always was. The Nobel prize is not the end all measure of quality, it is also a political choice. That being said, great writers received the award and of the few that I've read I'm yet to see one that I would call a "bad writer".

But this reaction to the Nobel prize ("bullshit!") only shows how much importance we give to it. As if when left unsatisfied we would seek the redemption of our expectations: "there should be an award that is an imediate reflection of quality".

Do not forget of the political implications of the Nobel prize. Also don't get /pol/ over it because it is a woman or something like that. Enjoy it as a safe recommended reading.

>>4173110
bet you haven't seen the new Metallica movie.

[Western male chauvanist perspective] When women and Asians win there is something wrong [/Western male chauvanist perspective]

There's a lot of incredibly good modern literature, its just hard to judge it so when you don't have a few generations between you and the text.

>>4173107
If you're paying attention to the Oscars then you have no clue what you're doing

>>4173112
Not even in the top 50 living filmmakers

>>4173144
This board makes me sad

>>4173144
[narrow-minded idiot perspective] [unwarranted righteous indignation] [/narrow-lbabhlfb

LIterature today just isn't as good as it used ot be, you know? It's just like, missing something. The words are different and everything. It's just not the same

>>4173115
I know enough about it to know it's shit. "My life growing up in Canada as a woman" wins, that's a bit odd.
>>4173144
The only modern writer I respect is a woman, fuckwit. Also, I like AZN girls.
>>4173162
Thanks for good input.

>Captcha daeifi them, close enough

>>4173184
>The only modern writer I respect is a woman

Lol, then let's hear who it is. This should be fun.

>>4173184
Barbery?

>>4173190
Stephanie Meyer

I should have said only living author I have respect for.
But Celia Green, I did say I only read old lit/classics, (which it obviously wouldn't be) Textbooks (Wouldn't class a textbook writer as an authout/writer) which leaves philosophy, fuck lit is dumb, no wonder i haven't been here for a month.

>>4173194
Will have a look at her though, thanks for not being a retard.

>>4173208
Oh, that's actually a good choice, and I've read her.

>>4173107
The Oscars are shit and always have been. Modern cinema is fine even if Hollywood isn't doing too well.

>>4173223
What book/s?
She's a fucking genius. I seriously thought I understood her, then I re read, and understood how fucking incredible the weight of her words are.
I want to go over to England and work with her, but I am too poor to afford to, as I'm actually homeless lol.

>>4173110
>implying you watch anything besides Marvel movies.

>>4173158
then fuck off you over-sensitive cunt

>>4173235
Mind the tone. There are impressionable kids on here.

>>4173117
>not very different from al other Nobel prizes
How was this years award in physiology or medicine politically motivated?

>>4173294
What a tragedy that Phillip Roth didn't win a fucking award. Oh, the fucking humanity.

Listen, no one is going to look back in 50 or 100 years and say, "Man, what an oversight it was that they never gave the Nobel to Roth." Pynchon, maybe, but not Phillip fucking Roth, man.

>>4173294
he has an entirely no expression in this picture, it's like he's turned 'nothing' into an emotion, but without being tao lin

>>4173288
Or physics or chem. I agree. As the OP, I am quite dissapoint, the first 3 Nobels all had good significance to me. This was just a 'really?' moment.

>>4173301
Why are you so disappointed about it? What do you dislike so much about Alice Munro? You seem to be starting with the assumption that Alice Munro does not deserve a Nobel, without going into any reasons for that, it's very odd.

Thousands of books published each year, dozens of famous novelists many of them quite prolific, the Nobel Prize Committee has a pretty tough time.
I'm ok with their choice simply because they chose someone known for short stories. It's a medium that deserves recognition in a market oversaturated with novels that just aren't that good (like the majority of Roth's work).

>>4173304
I stated, I find it rather strange that a woman can write about 'the coming of age' of a femlae in Canada, i.e. herself, and win a fucking Nobel. For example, why didn't someone with much more depth and understanding win? That is what the Nobel prizes are for, a major contribution, not some fucking, 'I had to become a woman from a girl in Canada.'

>>4173314
>I stated, I find it rather strange that a woman can write
you're already misogynist at this point, if we're being honest

>>4173314
With all due respect, it kind of sounds like you just don't think it's possible for her to have made a major contribution because she's a woman / writing about women. You don't really talk about how she has a lack of depth, understanding, or quality except, "Is a woman, in Canada".

>>4173314
I'm not him and I haven't read Munro either. But you really have to see it for yourself. If the tagline here was "I had to sit for a month starring at the wall" I would still hold myself not to call it impossible for a good writer to go with that. But that's also part of what makes great writers great, they could go on about it in a very unique and substantial way.

Also, agreed with others, you sound misogynist as fuck.

>>4173314
>wahhh why can't wimmin write about me me me

I don't think there are any women writers quite as good as the best men writers, and I suspect it will always be that way, but that's just my opinion,.

>>4173340
True. I /am/ profoundly more interesting a subject
than any woman.

"Runaway" – a woman is trapped in a bad marriage.
"Chance" – Juliet takes a train trip which leads to an affair.
"Soon" – Juliet visits her parents with her child Penelope.
"Silence" – Juliet hopes for news from her adult estranged daughter Penelope.
"Passion" – A lonely small town girl flees a passionless relationship with an outsider.
"Trespasses" – Lauren, a young girl, meets an older woman, Delphine, who is too interested in her.
"Tricks" – Robin, a lonely girl, lives life alone due to bad luck and misinterpretation.
"Powers" – Tessa, a psychic girl, leaves town. Her friend finds her years later in a compromised position

THE BANAL HAS FINALLY CONQUERED

CHOP OFF YOUR DICKS MEN, IT'S TIME TO TALK ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS

>>4173346
She wrote a story about someone with psychic powers? OK, this award is now officially bullshit.

>>4173346
so what yr saying is that you're not just indifferent, but actively hostile, to the existence of anything that doesn't fundamentally reflect yr own experiences and interests?

>>4173347
well there's nothing to say about that, I guess.

>>4173346
"A Portrait of the Arist as a Young Man" - a boy goes through puberty
"The Divine Comedy" - a guy visits Hell
"To the Lighthouse" - a family contemplates visiting a lighthouse
"As I Lay Dying" - A family transports a coffin

>>4173358
>a guy travels through Hell, Purgatory, & Heaven, talking to all of history's famous figures
>banal
Ha- um.

>>4173352
tbh i think her books suck and she's a boring provincial gift bag of quaintness who will be remembered by no one

whether she "reflects my experiences" is not important, she reflects boring, useless experiences, because she's a soft effeminate crappy weak author who writes the literary equivalent of 15 year old blog entries

hth

>>4173364
>fantasy

Not even once. Not Nobel worthy

>>4173321
>>4173323
>>4173340
Holy fuck, read past the word women for once. Stop thinking lit is misogynistic because men have been noticed for better writing in the past. There are brilliant women writers, but let's be honest, not as many as men. Anyway, I am starting to sound misogynistic at this point, but really, my point is that she wrote about something so mediocre and wins, not that she was a woman, fuck, I'm going to get much more drunk than i am now because 80% of lit is fucking retarded.

>>4173347
dick pix plox

>>4173371
'av u even red her books?

>>4173370
I think it's actually what's usually called 'religious fiction' tbh m9

>>4173372
If I post that I will get teh b7

>>4173366
well that's fair enough

"chop off your dicks men it's time to talk about feelings" is still a dumb as fuck thing to say

>>4173371
the problem was that the way your post came off, it sounded like you were criticizing her for being a woman, not for being a writer

anyway, w/e

You can't post dick on a blue board.

>>4173378
every anonymous poster is the same poster

CHOP YOUR DICKS OFF TALK ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS is a serious critique of a nobel prize winner

REAL cool dudes think feminism is a-ok

>>4173380

>>4173383
REAL MEN WEAR PINK

I WILL ARTIFICIALLY AFFIX UNWANTED DICK ON U IF YOU DON'T LIKE FEELINGS OR HAVE PATIENCE FOR FEMINISM

FOURTH WAVE INCOMING - Get ready!~

>>4173383
iawtp

just freemasons fucking with us

nobody reads that garbage

>>4173386
What does that mean?

>that feeling of disgust when you realize /fit/ is more sensitive, well read, intelligent, and reasonable than this cesspool

>>4173392
I have not been there, but they aren't.

>coming of age
>boring
>woman in canada
>woman
>inane woman
>woman
>boring
>ADD year of diagnosis
>i'm not a misogynist
>woman
>left-wing
>shitposting general
>R.P.P /lit/
>anno domini&etc

how about you morons,
how about you morons stop judging the book by what the plot is about
how about you morons actually read the works instead of judging them by what she writes about?

this rampant fucking anti-intellectualism is being taken too far

>>4173392
>implying it's not just me ruining everything

>>4173400
The value of a work can be judged based on how interesting its subject matter is.

>>4173392
/fit/ is dumb as shit. They're a bunch of insecure narcissistic meatheads with BDD and /pol/-affectations

Some people read to engage with different perspectives and ideas, some people read to enjoy a thorough examination of their own perspectives and ideas.
That one is better than the other is a pretty puerile argument, from either position. Munro got the Prize because the judges thought she deserved it, quit trying to shout down mountains.

>>4173358
lol'd out loud

>>4173428
That is a redundant statement.

>>4173431
RIP in piece, my comment then :'(

Quit bitching so hard. Anyone with a brain wouldn't be surprised that a prestigious annual award needs to fulfill its female quota every now and again. She definitely doesn't "deserve" it but no one is surprised. The next few years at least will be based on merit and see a return to male authors.

>>4173431
fuckin lit so hard to love
4chan class treasurer 4 sure

>>4173446
I can think of a few females whom I think deserve it more than her.

>>4173446
>yfw even Hemingway admitted Karen Blixen (Isak Dinesen) should have won over him

Male predominance is inscribed into the symbolic order (Don't take me seriously)

>>4173110
No it's really not

>>4173457
Correct.

I'm only disappointed that they chose someone from such a niche area of literature.

How does chronicling Ontario matter on a global scale?

>>4173451
Right, but you're an idiot.

>>4173144
>chauvanist
How did you type out the address for 4chan without messing it up?

Really, the question I have is: Isn't it interesting how Munro jumped to second place on Ladbrokes's odds list about eight hours before she won? Didn't Swedish police have to investigate this type of thing when it happened with Transtromer? It's a bit odd.

Also, really, Munro deserves it more than some of the recent laureates (Le Clézio comes to mind).

>>4173622
>implying I didn't win fair and square

>>4173598

She's more a chronicler of the hidden depth and easily-overlooked significance of domestic lives. Most people in the world have domestic lives.

She's also an excellent stylist. Although we have become used to them now, the way her stories are structured was also quite daring, sometimes even experimental, when she first came on the scene.

>>4173635
Give me some examples of these daring stories.

>>4173598
I'm only disappointed that they chose someone from such a niche area of literature.

How does chronicling Macondo matter on a global scale?

>>4173648

Basically most of the ones she's written? It's a subtle innovation, but ever since the 1950s shes told stories in strange order, taken pages to create a structure before dropping, unexpectedly, a single charge of energy into an unexpected spot, activating the entire narrative superstructure. Part of her skill is that, unless you're paying attention, you don't even notice how weird the whole narrative mechanism of the story is.

>>4173622
I must be the only person who actually likes Le Clézio. The Flood and War are really powerful books imo.

Jelinek and Lessing were weaker recent winners, I think.

I don't think there was a leak this year --- or if there was, it was lost in the noise. When Jon Fosse and that Belarusian journalist suddenly appeared on the odds sheets I feared the worst, and so did everyone else I think, resulting in a betting rush that shortened the odds even more and made it look even dodgier.

>>4173657
Yes, there is a certain jejune effervescence in how she sublimates the Same to the Other and unleashes a burst of creative ennui and elan and joi de vivre at the precise moment that nothing happens because it's a book about a housewife old dusty cunt bitch

>>4173598
A provincial setting doesn't necessarily mean a work can't contain universal relevance.

>>4173657
>shes told stories in strange order, taken pages to create a structure before dropping, unexpectedly, a single charge of energy into an unexpected spot, activating the entire narrative superstructure.

Sounds like plenty of stories before the 1950s.

>>4173160

>no [/unwarranted... part

filthy entry level fedoracore shitposting autisperglord

>>4173408

disagree with /pol/-affectations but they are a bit dumb

fair enough lifting gets you big but to think it's a reflection of someone being motivated is wrong

ITT: No one has actually read Munro but she's shit from the summaries on Wikipedia.

>>4173598
>>4173346
>>4173314
You lot in particular are bewilderingly ignorant.

>>4173692
>people don't agree with me abloobloobloo

>>4173704
Agree with what? I gave no opinion, and it doesn't matter, anyone who genuinely thinks setting or plot is a mark of quality or relevant at all is obviously an inept moron with a teenager-mentality.

>>4173692

It's obvious no one ITT has read Munro because, while reviews and internet summaries are always "Southern Ontario housewives! Small-town girls!" they totally ignore how perverted and weird Munro is. Three pages into a Munro story and there will be a mutilated corpse or a bizarre sex act or a horrifying mental institution just casually there in the story, no more remarkable than the post office on the main street of the small town its set in. She really gets the banality of evil.

>>4173719
>put lolsorandum and edgy together
>get described as having a cunning insight on the banality of evil

Pleb

>>4173719
>they totally ignore how perverted and weird Munro is

Which totally has anything to do with talented writing.

>>4173734
It has to do with morons kneejerking and criticizing books they haven't read.

>>4173719
>She really gets the banality of evil.
Stephen King- and GRRM-tier 'scary' is not the banality of evil.

Obama bombing Syria for shits and giggles and off-handedly wiping out the entire Syrian Christian minority is the 'banality of evil'.

Your examples are just middle-class edgy nerve-tickling, not evil.

>>4173773
read the books, idiot

>>4173773

> Comparing Stephen King to Alice Munro

Notice how no one here actually read her works

I'm leaving this board

>>4173980
Nope, that's just your baseless assumption and confirmation bias.

>>4173980

You're just now noticing all the posturing that goes on here?

I have not read anything by her. I can't say Scythian about here either-way.

>>4173404
how about we just rename this board /wikipedia/