/lit/ - Literature

>>4396782
>talking about this nerd shit at a PARTY

They were probably just trying to play along with you in the nicest way possible without offending you and pointing out that you are a social retard.

I study Lit
the others on my course are mostly likeable, really nice people, I've made some good friends
but a lot are idiots

People don't want to talk about /lit/ at a party, man. The only exception being when everyone's taken pills.

>>4396787
>>4396806

It wasn't that kind of party. I'm not autism, these people were very keen to discuss what little they had read.

>>4396782
>These kids haven't even read the bible and they pretend to read literature?
I dislike this sentiment. Just because it's common for authors to reference the bible in someway doesn't mean you need to have read a long ass religious text to understand literature.

>>4396822
Well I guess you're just better than them. Go you.

>>4396832

It's pretty important. Just go read it, it's very enjoyable and not all that long.

>>4396845I went to catholic school for 12 years so I have read it. It's just not that important.

>>4396853

You must not read very much literature if you don't think it's important. The bible is incredibly relevant if you want to read and understand pretty much the entire western canon. It's not important if you're focusing on Chinese lit or something though.

>>4396858

Adding to this that a list of authors based out of Europe who routinely employ biblical illusions, themes, metaphors, touch on biblical topics or cite/indirectly mention the bible at all would probably include practically every single author who wrote in the last two thousand years.

It's like, would you try and read Milton/Blake/Dante without reading the bible? Of course not.

>>4396858
It's not important OP

Other than understanding Western value what else is there

>inb4 you haven't read it

>>4396878

See this post I just made

>>4396863

Also guys this isn't actually an argument. If you don't think the bible is important when it comes to western literature you are quite honestly mistaken, there is no debate to be had here.

>>4396863

lol you can pretty easily read a lot of Blake without having read the bible

not that hard

>>4396893

You... you can read the words on the page but you're going to be missing so much. Are... are you guys actually arguing this? Because I'm honestly completely flabbergasted by the ignorance I'm seeing on display here.

>>4396888
>I'm right and you're all wrong because I've read a book called the bible

>>4396782

Well adjusted people don't base their self-worth on the quality or amount of books they've read. It sounds like you do because that's the only thing you have. Maybe you have nothing else to talk about because you're boring? Your post reads like a thinly disguised defense of your bruised ego.

>>4396906

I am right though... The bible is important to read if you want to fully understand most works in western literature because any author you can name employed a boat load of biblical allusions and references. The same is also true, though to a lesser extent, of the ancient greek myths.

>>4396900
>I'm honestly completely flabbergasted by the ignorance I'm seeing on display here.

Welcome to /lit/. Enjoy your stay.

>>4396912

This sort of criticism is fair, I would also have judged my post in the same way. I just read a lot and expected to enjoy discussing what I read with other people who are passionate about reading and instead I got a room full of people who either haven't read much or have read with an ear to partisan politics and furthering their own personal bias.

>>4396915
No , You are holding merely an opinion

I've read the Bible before and from what you're saying you're acting like it's a pinnacle of knowledge in Lit
Although, you're right about the Western stand points

>>4396922

I'm not holding an opinion... The Bible is important regarding Western literature... this is... lol wtf am I reading.

None of you have even bothered to respond to the solid reasons I've given for the bible being important you just keep saying "no".

Are you all honestly just retarded or something?

>>4396782
>party
>talking about books
ahahahahahahahahah oh my god just stay home next time fuckface

>>4396931
No, they just resent their parents for making them go to church.

>>4396915
>>4396888
this is why people dont like talking to you :^)

>>4396942
He's right, and these people are being stupid. It would be best to just ignore those who don't even put up an argument.

>>4396942

Because they're idiots who make ridiculously false statements without a scrap of reason behind them? Saying the bible is unimportant in the consideration of western literature is like saying oxygen is unimportant for respiration.

>>4396947
>These kids haven't even read the bible and they pretend to read literature?

he's a condescending retard with whom i wouldn't exchange more than 2 words irl

>>4396926
Whatever Johnny

>>4396926
I'm not saying it's not important but I'm saying it's not that necessary to lead to a greater ideology in Li t

>>4396952

You sound sort of personally offended. I assume you're one of those people who hasn't read homer, virgil, the bible, Milton, or even Skahespeare but pretends to be well read on the internet.

>>4396952
People who make public fools of themselves should be treated accordingly.

Condescension is an appropriate response to charlatans.

>>4396957

>greater ideology

Huh? The bible is one of the building blocks which the vast majority of authors writing in the west have made use of as a building block for their own works. You wouldn't expect to understand a text without understanding the language right? Well the same is true for the underlying allusions and references the author employs and notes can only go so far as to explaining every little theme and snippet which help convey the authors meaning to the reader.

>>4396961
oh gee i didn't realize i'm in the kindergarten literature avengers neighborhood

This depends on the college town you were in.

If you were talking to a bunch of Eastern Tennessee State students then it seems a bit presumptuous of you to expect deep insight or familiarity with the literature,.

Either that or they noticed the giant zit on the tip of your nose and wanted to end the conversation as soon as possible.

gj op youre so much better than them sure showed them plebs god forbid people start reading or trying to gain knowledge later than your holy self, and discussing it with each other? the nerve.

>>4396965
>The bible is one of the building blocks which the vast majority of authors writing in the west have made use of as a building block for their own works.
[citation needed]

Also, the bible was built upon other books, you know you have to read all of them before, right?

>>4396966
>oh gee i didn't realize

a recurring theme in your life

>>4396965
Have you read the Torah ?

> building block for their own works
Example

Also, despite the party You sound like a very annoying man

>>4396976
pow pow i got #obliterated

~game over~

>>4396974

Citation needed... Have you... have you read anything? Besides I DID employ a citation, practically any canonized work of western literature employs biblical reference.

Check out some shit by

William Blake
William Shakespeare
Leo Tolstoy
Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Charlotte Bronte
Herman Melville
Dante
Chaucer
Malory
(Almost every single poet)
Goethe
Emily Bronte
Faulkner
Joyce
Woolf
Victor Hugo
Proust

Like I could go on and list 95% of authors who have contributed to western literature in the last two millennia but what's the point.

>>4396989
What's the part where you need to have read the bible to understand Dostoyevsky?

>>4396977

Yes I have read the Torah... it's a part of the bible you complete ignoramus. Or are you trolling me now?

>example

See post below... it's not surprising you miss the allusions in every single fucking book you read because you haven't read the source works.

Honestly this is almost beyond belief... having people ask to see citations for the claim that biblical illusions are present in western literature. Beyond ignorant.

>talking about literature
I can hardly hold conversation about the weather let alone what I've read

>>4396999
>mfw this guy read the bible so he can get some references
top kek

>>4396999
It's Not technically part of the bible but I get your point

>Check out some shit by
Is not like saying "Read X by X it show it in there"

Despite their pretentions of intellectualism, most people aren't interested in having their views challenged. Especially at a party.

Most of these plebs dislike you because you're providing a real problem that they neither asked for, nor desire to respond to. But they're intellectuals right? Bzzzt, cognitive dissonance, so they attack you instead.

OP, live by the principle of the master appearing when the student is ready. Most of these students aren't ready and never will be. Your arguments will hold greater authority when YOU are held in authority. Until then, you're just some douche trying to argue with them.

>>4396998

His entire life philosophy is based around the Orthodox church and his great novels are literally steeped in religious imagery and themes. Who does Myshkin in the idiot remind you of? The Possessed is largely allegorical to the book of revelations and the vast majority of Dostoyevsky's famous protagonists are undergoing existential crisis's due to what he would have perceived to be a lack of spiritual fluffiness in their lives.

>>4397010
Why would I need to be reminded of someone, or get some allegories? How would that improve my reading experience if I could say 'oh this guy i like that other guy that i read somewhere else'?

>>4397009
>OP, live by the principle of the master appearing when the student is ready. Most of these students aren't ready and never will be. Your arguments will hold greater authority when YOU are held in authority. Until then, you're just some douche trying to argue with them.

Woah NowI understand!

Thanks Anon !

>>4396942
true

>>4397009

You misunderstand. I wasn't condescending at the time and they didn't dislike me. I didn't challenge any views.

>>4397005

Yes... that's part of an education.

>>4397008

It is technically part of the bible, it's part of the old testament which Christians as well as Jews accept,

>The Bible (from Koine Greek τὰ βιβλία, tà biblía, "the books") is a canonical collection of texts considered sacred in Judaism as well as in Christianity.

The mental blindness on display here is revolting.

The bible is built upon all the books released prior. Have you read all of them OP? You don't wanna miss a potential reference

>>4397018
I like the part when you googled it for source too check if I were right

>>4397014

In the same way you need to know the language well to understand the point of view and meaning of the text. I am honestly like... I can't believe people are arguing that understanding the references or allusions in a work is not important... on a literature forum. It's pretty pathetic to be honest.

>>4396782

>went to a top-ranked MFA program
>almost nobody discussed novels
>most talked about movies
>ironically

I got along well with almost everybody and made a number of friends, but few shared a great enthusiasm for books. Took me a few months to realize that every MFA program has a significant number of wannabe screen writers who think their ticket to Hollywood is won by optioning a best-selling novel. Another contingent is rich white women looking to play author.

>>4397028

That's all you can come up with eh? You honestly think that other people are as stupid as you? I googled it to get a definition of bible to paste into this thread so you wouldn't make me "cite" my point of view.

I am on a literature website talking to people who don't know what the bible is and don't think allusions, references or allegories are important frameworks in which to view a test.

Unbelievable.

>>4397031
Either bring an actual argument, or go play somewhere else kiddo

>>4397033
>literature website
>4chan

This is why my visits here are few and far between.

>>4397033
I'm surprised by the fact that you still think I'm arguing with some faggot on the internet about the Bible being relevant to references in Lit

I'm surprised you even carried on after I posted a troll face

>>4397039

I did

>In the same way you need to know the language well to understand the point of view and meaning of the text.

My argument is that a novel or verse piece is more than written words, there will often be a theme, a tone, a point being made and understanding the references the author placed in the text to further his/her point is important to the understanding of what he or she wanted to say.

It's important because the author found it important and based their text around these allusions and allegories.

Why am I humouring you mongoloids. How about one of you provide an argument for why being able to pick up on references is NOT beneficial for understanding fully a piece of literature.

>>4397045

Oh you were just pretending to be that retarded, that sure shows me.

op you need to stop masturbating over being right

>>4397018
Dude, are you serious? Bible is not really neccesary to understand most of the literature if you have some basic comprehension skills and can connect the dots. Even further, my ignorance can help to see some works in different perspective, you Bloomian scholar, thus amplifying my gains from literature. But do get your panties in a twist when other Anons point this out - it's highly amusing.

>>4397049

>>4397053

>Bible is not really neccesary to understand most of the literature

What do you mean by understand? You can gain a ton by reading classic works without ever picking up any of the allusions, but that doesn't mean that the allusions aren't important. Do any of you know what important means?

>>4397050
No I simply got bored of arguing with you when I said before that you were right on it being an important piece of lit but not about it being necessary on understanding references in others

That's like saying you have too watch LOTR too understand the movie

>>4397048
Oh lawd, so you want to understand the author's "message".

Some people don't read to get enlightened, find what the author meant, or discover the meaning of life. Some people read because they enjoy the prose, and they like to give works their personal meaning, with little regard to hidden references, easter bunnies, and secret messages.

>Sure, I never go anywhere
>I never go anywhere
It shows.

Give it up, OP. You are right but you are also a total cunt, so no one is going to agree with you. It's hard to believe that you are imperceptive enough not to have figured this out already.

You're getting played for a fool, OP. I assure you everyone here understands the influence of The Bible on western literature, whether they've actually read it or not. It would be senseless to continue arguing with people who are obviously just trying to get a rise out of you.

I've never read the Bible, which bits are worthwhile and which bits are skippable?

>>4397070
>worthwhile
none of it
>skippable
everything

>>4397068
I, in fact do not understand this influence, and OP seems to have failed put up any arguments for it.

What's a good edition of the bible that I should pick up in order to actually read it, and what would the best way be to go about reading it (like a novel)?

>>4397059
It's more like saying you need to read The Silmarillion in order to understand LotR (Note that I don't actually think this, I just think it's a better way of saying what you're trying to say)

>>4397062
>they like to give works their personal meaning

You cut out a picture of your face and put it over Bella's, didn't you. "Mrs. Cullen" written repeatedly in the margins.

>>4397070
>mfw this guy actually got tricked into considering reading it
10/10 op

>>4397078
o shit he pulled off some references, better read that bible to get this post then

>>4396989

How much of the greek/roman canon have your studied? Because pretty much everyone from the first fifteen hundred years of modern civilization alludes to that shit as much or more than the bible.

>>4397078
That's easy - the personal meaning I get from this is that the author tries too hard to appear well-read and thinks that namedropping will impress his readers.

Good thing most of the authors are not imposing a prerequisite reading for the reader to derive enjoyment from the work

>>4397027
This

>>4397091
Suppose it depends on where and how you believe meaning is derived from a text, on a scale of 100% author to 100% reader.

A) Reading the Bible for its importance in literature is redundant and onerous. What you'd gain from reading the Bible you could also gain from footnotes, scholars, biographers, Cliff/Spark notes, etc. and actually gain insight based upon context rather than an "ah-ha! I'm erudite! I knew it!" feeling.
B) Even if you did read the Bible for this purpose, good luck retaining all of that. That's quite a bit of material spread across centuries of literary works. You're stuck studying the Bible.
C) Now what? You can identify allusions, great, what do those allusions mean? You're not sure? Better research into scholarly articles, biographies, maybe even peak into a Cliff's... oh, wait...
D) This modern work alludes to something that's actually an allusion of an allusion to the Bible. What now? You should check out scholar's articles, maybe a biographer's account, or Wikipedia... oh, wait...

That you should read the entire Bible for its literary importance in this day and age is anachronistic at best. Like all of OP's sentiments in this thread, it's superficial. Having a copy of the Bible is handy and interesting for an in-depth study (study, not read) of classic literature, reading the whole book is a waste of time unless you're a Christian and/or a Biblical scholar.

>>4397107
>Now what? You can identify allusions, great, what do those allusions mean?
>implying everyone is as stupid as you are

>>4396782
Good conversationalists seek out topics of common understanding. So if everyone's read Vonnegut and H.S Thompson, you should talk Vonnegut and New Journalism.
Most of this kind of talk isn't actually being able to reference works, but to apply arguments from them, or to just use the plain old Socratic method and draw people's beliefs out. Ask the feminist probing questions about her feminism.

>>4396863
>>4396999
>illusions
>mfw op was trying to say biblical allusions all this time

>>4397111
>implying allusions are self-evident, unambiguous, and unilateral
What you're saying is entirely beside the point anyhow, the point being, why bother re-creating the entire argument when you could get to the crux of it and proceed from there?
Reading the whole Bible for its literary importance is a waste of time. You could gain the exact same knowledge with less time and have it contextualized so that you can agree with or innovate the argument as you please.

>>4397123
>reading the footnotes, biographies and explanations for every book you'll ever going to read
>less time than reading bible once and get them

>>4397125
Pretty sure I already covered this:
>B) Even if you did read the Bible for this purpose, good luck retaining all of that. That's quite a bit of material spread across centuries of literary works. You're stuck studying the Bible.
There is no way you could canvass the same amount of ground as hundreds of scholars who did it before you. You're arrogantly assuming you can do the same amount of work as dozens of others who came before you. There is no way you could possibly retain and infer that much from a /single/ reading of the Bible. You are stuck studying the Bible.
Or, you can do what I already said, which is to have a copy of it with you, and use it for reference. That would be the intelligent and efficient thing to do. Just reading it all the way through one time is a fool's errand.

>>4397059

You don't think the bible is necessary when it comes to picking up biblical allusions? That's nonsense.

>>4397062

It's not just "little hidden easter bunnies" often times it's a big plot point or allusions are used to describe something/characters or character motivations. Most people find enjoyment in fully understanding a text. I keep a dictionary by my chair and if I don't understand a word I look it up and write it down so that next time I encounter the word I will understand what the author is trying to convey without loss of time or immersion. Do you considering learning more words to better understand an authors meaning a waste of time?

>>4397068

I hope this is the case, but I don't think it is.

>>4397070

Well the new testament is about a quarter of the length of the old testament and is generally more interesting. When I read through I skipped a lot of the genealogy stuff.

>>4397074

Go back and read the thread. I posted a lot of reasons references and allusions are important and not a single person has addressed them.

>>4397076

King James is pretty definitive and you can read it like a novel but it might be best to get a companion text like "The Oxford Companion to the Bible" in order to get better context, history and what not.

>>4397086

Quite a bit of it. I mentioned in a different post that ancient greek/roman literature is an imperative if you want to read the western canon well. You simply can't understand what Milton or Dante are saying without having a thorough grounding in the greeks.

>>4397091

It's not just name dropping, it's... fuck it's a big part of your language and heritage you dumb cunt. Have you ever read a poem? If you've read a poem you must have noticed that the language tends towards metaphors and allusions or references to say more than can be expressed in a few words and that in order to understand said poem you need to get these clues.

>>4397107

A. Both are valuable. I personally find that footnotes are not always particularly valuable for grasping the meaning of a reference, a footnote will often just say "this references X", leaving you to consult the reference yourself. It makes sense to skip the middle man and get a working knowledge of something so important yourself.

B. Yes, studying the bible is important, but even a single read through with some companion text will serve you pretty well,

C. Often the allusions are very simple and are part of the beauty and language of the text. You will need to study a LOT to get all the references and layers in great works of literature, that's part of making them great works and there is nothing wrong with that.

D. I never said the bible is the only resource you should consult, but it applies to nearly ever canonical author so it's hugely important. If I want to understand Chekhov, or Charlotte Bronte I would do well to read biographies of them both and some criticism of their works.

>>4397129
good points, i'll concede my argument

>>4397122

I said allusions every time, if I misspelt it as illusions it's because of autocorrect.

>That you should read the entire Bible for its literary importance in this day and age is anachronistic at best. Like all of OP's sentiments in this thread, it's superficial. Having a copy of the Bible is handy and interesting for an in-depth study (study, not read) of classic literature, reading the whole book is a waste of time unless you're a Christian and/or a Biblical scholar

Very, very few scholars or writers would agree with this statement. The Bible is valuable to read as the root of western literature (along with the ancient greeks and romans, I'm not discounting other reference works or texts when I say the Bible is important) and it's interesting and well written itself. Read the Bible in juxtaposition to Blake, Milton or Defoe and you will probably learn something.

Any author born before the 20th century was likely immersed in the bible, and biblical studies and a good chunk of influential writers practically gained all of their literary knowledge and focus from the Bible.

if op is so smart then why doesn't he just publish scholarly papers about literature so he can talk to other academics who would conceivably give enough of a damn to construct an intelligent response?

>>4397125

Ideally you will do both.

>>4397143
because he isn't

By reading enough of the Western canon, could I not retroactively absorb the most important themes and ideas of The Bible? If it's influence is really so pervasive, would a well-read person not be familiar enough, even if just sub-consciously, to appreciate its significance? And it's not like biblical allusion is ever particularly subtle, not to mention almost always a main point of discussion for any sort of critical analysis. What I'm saying is, if you read enough, you'll be getting a healthy dose of The Bible whether you like it or not.

Also, I realize "retroactively" is almost certainly not the correct word to use above, but it sounds right in my head, so I'm using it all the same.

>>4397145
why do the latter if i'm doing the former anyway?

OP, can you give us a short biography of your life so we can fully understand you?

>>4397148
>it's
why dont you go read an ABC

How old are you OP?

>>4397148
I think you'd be getting a stronger dose of whatever interpretation the author chose, or what the time period held in vogue. You might discern that a particular story's interpretations vary but you wouldn't necessarily know the actual text of the original. Was Eve created from dust, or Adam's rib?

>>4397148

You definitely do a little bit. Hell even just existing in a Western nation you will pick up a ton of the new and old testament. It's interesting but when I went back and read the bible for the first time after reading a lot of literature I found myself constantly going "wow that was referenced in X" etc. It was pretty cool.

>>4397150

It's just easier to learn the root source of the stories in the bible and what they mean to identify references than to get a fragmented footnote which is up to the publisher. Footnotes are great, they often reference all sorts of things, my copy of portrait of the artist goes into great detail about the biblical allusions and references to Irish history in the book, but I would be crazy to think that reading the rest of the bible and getting a thorough understanding of Irish history wouldn't 'help' my understanding of joyce.

The thing is we have limited time and inclination so while we all should ideally (though this thread makes me uncertain) desire to fully understand what we read we can't all read six books of criticism period history for each novel we read. The bible is quite simply a very good time investment for furthering your understanding of the works of poetry and prose you read.

>>4397132
>Do you considering learning more words to better understand an authors meaning a waste of time?
I double tap the word on my e-reader and get the definition instantly. I don't make an effort to retain the meaning of obscure words that are not appropriate to use in almost any circumstance. Extend this to hidden references/footnotes

Read your thread OP, maybe people don't talk to you because you sound like a total faggot. You have a standard of literature comprehension that you've set for yourself. You expect everyone else to meet that standard. This is flat out wrong. Sure, you see the benefit of it, but projecting that requirement onto everyone else interested in a general topic is really stupid.

Your bible argument is just painful. It's like getting angry at someone for enjoying steak if they haven't had cow tongue first. I'm sure after eating it you'll have a greater appreciation for filet mignon, but it's not required to enjoy it. Some people like the experience of reading, even if they don't understand every reference or phrase.

tl;dr You talk like a fag and your shit's all retarded. Get that straightened out pronto.

death of the authors, motherfuckers

>>4397158

Is it possible, in lieu of pointing out overlooked grammatical errors, to attend to the discussion at hand? Thanks

>>4397169

Terrible analogy and you're just another retard who is poorly read and pretends not to be on lit. I post on other literature forums and the disparity is just shocking.

>>4397164
>The thing is we have limited time and inclination so while we all should ideally (though this thread makes me uncertain) desire to fully understand what we read we can't all read six books of criticism period history for each novel we read. The bible is quite simply a very good time investment for furthering your understanding of the works of poetry and prose you read.

If after all this thread and all the arguments, you still think 'kids who haven't even read the bible shouldn't pretend to read literature', then you're wasting your time arguing - you gain nothing

>>4397172
nah, i'm smarter than this

>>4397174
Calm down, Bloom. I'm sure that you're the only one here with any discernable talent.

>>4397166

But there's no way to double tap all of the scriptural references and allusions and even if there were you would have trouble recognizing them without having read the bible yourself.

>>4397169
Tourette's Syndrome ≠ coherent argument

>>4397175

But that's true... if you haven't read the source works the western canon is built on then you aren't well read and you are missing out.

I'm honestly just detecting heavy quantities of butt hurt by anti intellectuals who don't want to learn anything and are affronted by the idea that they might not be as well read as they presume to be.

do you guys think most postgraduate or doctoral students of literature have read the bible

>>4397182
Yes, is is - through google.

Whatever I could discover by reading the bible once, has surely been discovered and written by more experienced scholars who've studied the bible for years. I'm not delusional enough to think I'll get a unique invaluable understanding just by reading the bible myself

>>4397219

What do you think scholarly interpretations of the bible are? What are you even talking about? You're not going to "discover" anything by reading the bible... nobody ever suggested you were, you're just going to know the stories, prophecies, scriptures and quotes well enough to pick them out in a novel or piece of poetry and infer the meaning the author was trying to convey through metaphor or allusion.

>>4397219
Why read anything at all then? More experienced people have already done it.

>>4397227
For pleasure and entertainment, Bazarov

>>4397219

Also looking things up repeatedly is the same fucking thing as actually reading the bible, just more haphazardly, in snippits and with a and less homogenous and coherent understanding.

>>4397226
>infer the meaning the author was trying to convey through metaphor or allusion.
Or I can read it up on the internet

>>4397237

You could, and that would require looking up pieces of almost everything you read if you were able to notice the bulk of references which are often rather subtle.

But I'm a little confused by your argument. You're willing to spend time looking things up so that you can learn them, but you aren't willing to spend time reading the actual source?

>>4397235
But with a better understanding because, as I said previously, it's unlikely that your one-time reading can catch more than what experts have been blah blah.

I'm bored, go read your bible

>>4397243
>But I'm a little confused by your argument. You're willing to spend time looking things up so that you can learn them, but you aren't willing to spend time reading the actual source?

Yeah, I've already explained why a couple of times

>>4397246

What experts have said regarding what? Do you know what a metaphor even fucking is? If someone makes a biblical allusion to describe something you don't need to get an "expert" take on the quotation... there won't even be one, a note will just send you to the quote because it doesn't need to be interpreted... what the fuck are you high on?

OP, seriously, at this point no one is even trying to have a discussion with you, although your point is valid (I probably will finally try to read the damn book cover to cover because of you). At the beginning someone might have been genuinely annoyed about the ascertion that you MUST read the Bible, but now you just remind me of that one friend who gets frustrated beyond belief over some generally innocent opinion, and is so funny while being in that state, that you just have to annoy him.

>>4397230
incorrect, we read so we can lord our intelligence over others at parties and to brag to 4chan about it

>>4397250

My fuck people like you are obstinate and stupid. I've never seen people prouder of their own ignorance than in this thread.

>I don't need to read the source works, I hate knowing fully what the author was trying to say, fuck that if I want to know a foot note will send me to an expert opinion on the citation which is of course way better than actually having read the cohesive unit

>>4397259

I honestly don't think so. I think the people in this thread are genuinely upset that they are having their level of literary understanding questioned and they are lashing out.

When you read the bible you will probably like the new testament more, and it's probably the most important to read; you get a ton out of just the gospels and you can knock all four off in a day easy. Don't get bogged down by all the genealogy and shit in genesis and later on, just skim that it's largely irrelevant. Good luck though.

>>4397262
You will never know what the author fully meant, and yes, an expert is more likely to understand it better than whatever you have gathered from reading the bible once a couple of years ago.

But we've been going in circles for a while, and I cba to entertain you anymore

>>4397267
>I think the people in this thread are genuinely upset that they are having their level of literary understanding questioned and they are lashing out.
>if you dont agree with me u must be mad and defensive

>>4397269

>You will never know what the author fully meant

That's very likely. But take a look at Jane Eyre, this is a novel which had immense autobiographical and spiritual importance for Charlotte bronte, the motifs in this book cover scads of stuff I'm not familiar with as well as common folk tales and the bible. You know the story of bluebeard? Good, it's essential to understanding Jane Eyre. You know Charlotte Brontes life story? It's important to understanding Jane Eyre. You read the Bible? It's extremely important to understanding Jane Eyre.

Look if I had a thousand lifetimes I couldn't fully understand every work in the western canon, that would be an impossible feat of research; all I'm saying is that when it comes to picking up a lot of important metaphorical or allegorical themes and allusions in western literature it is damn near impossible to beat the king james bible for economy of effort to sheer returns.

>>4397281
>if you dont agree with me u must be mad and defensive
>i think strawman arguments are an "I WIN" button

>>4397284
jane eyre is shit

>>4397281

>people are wrong and then they get called wrong and then they quote that they got called wrong and that makes them right

Logic. If you don't think that the bible is an important work in your understanding of the western canon then you're wrong that's all there is to it. Some people don't believe in evolution and they argue much like you guys do, they are also wrong.

>>4397291

Jane Eyre is not shit, but even if it were I was just using it as an example of the different layers you have to peel off to understand a text.

Want to understand the idiot? Jesus is the main allusion and Dostoyevsky's own experiences with his epilepsy are hugely important and he touches on lots of issues in Russia which were contemporary during his life. Reading about nineteenth century Russian history will help you understand nineteenth century Russian novels, but it won't help you understand Jane Eyre. What I'm saying is the bible is the most important text in western literature, nearly everyone uses it as a bedrock and reading it will benefit your reading of practically every canonical author.

How many times must I repeat myself?

>>4397302
lol read Death of the Author pleb all that shit irrelevant, you are imposing interpretations on the text and in doing so fundamentally limiting it.

>>4397302
the idiot is shit

>>4397315

I don't think so. I don't think you can discount all of scholarly research by saying "read this pleb". It's pretty stupid to be honest.

You guys are actually kind of making me sad... It makes me think that intelligent people are really rare in this world.

>>4397315

I just looked it up and it seems to pretty much only refer to biographical references tying in with the text. Does the essay also attempt to discount biblical or mythological allusions?

>>4397322
>>4397327
No, you see I was trying to mock the anti-intellectual post-modernist mindset which begins with Death of the Author.

Also, I appreciate the effort you are putting in here, so I have to tell you to stop posting. You are being rused /incredibly/ hard, and 100 posts in is long enough. I advise you not to come looking for sincerity on /lit/.

>>4397302
i'd have liked 100 years of solitude better if i didn't know colombian history

your 'understanding' is taking the pleasure of my type of reading. stop flaunting your art consuming technique as the only objectively correct one. im never gonna read the bible, and i do like and enjoy literature. piss off

>>4397337

Well stay ignorant then, not my problem.

OP how old are you

>>4397342
Why are you avoiding the question op?

>>4397379

23, it seemed irrelevant. If you're going to tell me what at 23 I can't be well read then I agree with you, you need to be like 65+ or at least 30

>So why is everyone such a fucking piece of shit?

because bals

>>4397390
I was wondering when you had the time to read all sorts of stuff. But you said you're not in university, so maybe you have lots of free time

>>4397398

I don't have a computer, tv, or much of a social life and I try to read about 200 pages a day, everyday, which ends up being like 20'ish books a month.

I dunno what "all this" you're referring to though since the only thing I've really mentioned is the bible.

Wait is this not the /lit/ humor thread?

>>4397404
So you live off mommy's money and pick on kids who actually try to pursue a career, or you have something going?

>>4397407
No, this is the autism thread.

>>4397408
He's a biblical scholar, so no, he has nothing going.

Is this book any good? Some friend recommended it to me and I feel like reading some fantasy stuff (Game of Thrones-liking pleb here).

Should I get it?

>>4397436
read the bible first if you want to understand the underlying concepts

>>4397436
well, shit, totally not where I wanted to post it but w/e I guess

>>4397436
10/10 would replace bible with

>>4397436
I thought it was great but some of the allusions were hard to understand at first. I had to keep a bible on hand for reference.

>>4397444
>>4397447
>>4397454
wth? can I safely assume that it's just irony on your part or does this really have something to do with bible?

>>4397436
I hope you've already read Peter V Brett's biography if you want to get it

>>4397444
>>4397445
>>4397447
>>4397468
made me lol

is this for real or what? the only time I've seen this book mentioned was some top 10 fantasy list amazon posted few years back

>>4397465
well all of western literature was influenced by the bible so you'd be a fool to read anything without having studied it intensely.

>>4397496
of course it's real. many great fantasy authors (as does Brett) draw stories and referencesfrom the Bible.

>some of my close university friends invite me to Christmas party
>don't really go out too much anymore, decide Why Not
>this short guy that is really smart but pretty impetus shows up
>always going on about bullshit that he's into around people that haven't read what he's read
>it's always really awkward because no one ever knows what to say
>he seems to go on about it for ages
>the worst thing is that he never takes the hint; he even belittled a few of us for whatever reason
>he name dropped all night and when no one really acknowledged him, he got despondent
>people who don't know him are like "wtf is wrong with this guy"
>Ive been friends with him for a while, so I try to defend him
>the truth is that everybody thinks he's a pretentious asshole and the core group of friends unofficially abandoned him long ago because of shit like this

>>4397511
but srsly, biography of some1 who wrote like... what? 5 books all being part of one series?

>>4397436
It was recommended me by my professor, but I'm still going through the prerequisite reading

>>4397516
Impetuous*
Sent from my i phone

>>4397523
cracked up right there

>>4397526
I hope your not using that iphone without having read the bible first. Most (if not all) western software devs have deep rooted influences from the bible.

>this thread

>>4397543
my sides : D

>>4397454
Fucking lost it

>>4396918
>instead I got a room full of people who either haven't read much or have read with an ear to partisan politics and furthering their own personal bias

Welcome to college 2013.

>>4397560
holy shit. how old are you?

>>4397551
college in 1870 was so much better

a)

Like many posters here, I too dont think that Reading the Bible is necessary to understand the major Works of western literature. Generally you can loose on or two references, and some of the deep layiers of meaning, but the majority of good books are like closed and independent universes: they stand on their own, and are able to move us or impress us without the need of any other knowledge. Even the Bible is dependent of several other texts and traditions, and so, if you think you must read every book that influenced posterior books, you will go into a reverse to infinity.

But above all other things, the problem with the Bible (I read the damn thing) is the fact that is very, very, very fucking boring. The problem is there already with Genesis, Exodus and Leviticus. I started the reading of these books expecting an enormous gift for language, but all that I got was a dry, harsh, naked and superficial prose. There are no metaphors, there are no similes, there is no imagery, only that dead prose that you can also find on legal documents or in instruction manuals. Some fuckers are going to say “Hur, dur, that’s the way you should write; you should get to the point, Hemingway is my hero, his prose is so clean, hur, dur”, but fuck that. If I am reading some ancient texts that are so famous around the world for their influence I expect something of the verbal brilliance of a Shakespeare, or at least the simple and primeval metaphors of a Homer. But no: the first books of the Bible are stylistically dead. Also, its characters, in spite of their fame, are all pseudo-beings. There is no profundity, nothing of the multitude of human details of a Tolstoy or a Joyce. No: there are enormous lists of names in histories that are made more to make people fear and respect the religious authorities than to give some real understanding of humanity.

>>4397572

b)

Then there are all that other books that are similar to the first 3-4 ones: all of them dry prose and bad characters. We finally come, after a while, to the prophets. Now, the prophets are regarded as poets, and I read them expecting some verbal pyrotechnics, but again I was frustrated. Their “poems” are almost the same dead language orchestrated into verse format; there are, to be fair, occasional great metaphors and similes, bur nothing that can stand in face of Shakespeare, for example. Also: these prophets are all terrible human beings. They are old and rancorous religious authorities that were treated as shit by other nations and got angry because their egos were not being respected. They are constantly offending everyone around them, desiring death and diseases to others, treating women as trash and speaking as if they were in constant contact with God, something that we all know that is false. They seem to drown in their own saliva with anger, and even so they can’t reach in their poetry of hate the glories of Shakespeare (like the accusations of Tymon of Athens, for example). Do you guys know asshole Aiatolá Khomeini, that old cancer with a constant hate-face who didnt like anything but the Koran and who decided that he was good enough to give orders to a whole country? Well, those ancient prophets are the same thing.

Some books that I enjoyed were Song of Songs, Job and Ecclesiastes. All of them have great poetry and some great pearls of wisdom. The answer of God to Job in the end, that speeches that erupt from the inside of a thunder storm, are among the greatest poetry excerpts ever written. I can’t even describe how amazed I was when I read them for the first time: finally Bible poetry was in the same level of Shakespeare. Song of Songs is great love poetry, in a very ancient and primitive style: it’s a fresh breeze of beauty and live among that old moldy prose of the Bible. Ecclesiastes is strange: its philosophy is against everything else found in the Bible, and I don’t even know how they accepted it on the Canon. Is a wonderful wisdom book, one of the greatest I ever read.

>>4397576

c)

Psalms are famous as a collection of poetry, but the general level of them is pretty low. By reading Shakespeare, Keats, Rimbaud, Coleridge, Pessoa, Whitman, Frost, and other poets you will gain much more. There are almost no metaphors and similes on the psalms (with some exceptions of great beauty, I must admit), and poems without imagery are no top-tier poems.

The New Testament is written in the same dry prose of the first Bible books. It tells the story of Jesus, and in general they all seem the same thing with some occasional inclusions or exclusions. Some of Christ’s doctrines are great, but there is still a lot of dependence of things like God and an Other World. But religiosity and meaning aside, the style of the New Testament is generally yawn inducing. One famous book is the Revelation, but it is much more a book of symbolism than of real poetry. It has the same rant of some of the French symbolists of the XIX century that are now justly forgotten, and if this book was not on the Bible nobody would read it today with the exception of scholars.

>>4397579
>>4397576
>>4397572
no1 cares anymore m8

>>4396782

>cousin supposedly well read
>she has entire City of Bones set

Dreadful. I failed her. I should have given her some books...

>>4397579

d)

So, after reading the entire Bible I can’t say that its fame is due to literary merits. Most of it is boring and shallow, and it’s only remembered because of its religious influence. If I had to choose between the surviving of Shakespeare’s or Tolstoy’s works and the one of the Bible, I would go with Shakespeare or Tolstoy all the way. Actually, if they proposed to me that, if I gave up half of Shakespeare in order to save the Bible, I would not make the deal, so literary far above the bible is the poetry of Shakespeare.

The Bible is influential, no doubt, but much more because of historical and religious aspects than of literary worth.

end.

>Dostoyevsky
>atheist
>misogynist
>writings are retarded

dafuckisthisshit?
It's the complete opposite

I've tried reading through the bible, but after reading up to the flood myth I lost interest after skimming page after page of "and so X begat Y." I don't know if I should skip ahead to the good bits about guilt and sin and hell and salvation or if I'll miss something.

>>4397598
the thing is, you have to read bible beforehand - otherwise you'll miss many allusions and metaphors

I have a confession to make, /lit/...

i don't know how to read and only own goosebumps novels.

>multiple posters seriously arguing that reading The Bible isn't integral if you want to have a well-rounded understanding of the allusions, metaphors and motifs of Western literature

Go back to /r/books with the other clueless plebs.

You aren't serious readers. You never will be.

>tfw i got trolled by /lit/ to read the bible last year
>tfw it didn't help me at all with anything
fuck you and your allusions /lit/

>>4397613
hope you kept the Bible around for references when reading them

>>4397616
>implying i don't read a couple of pages every day to make sure i have a well rounded understanding of the allusions

>tfw most of christians never read the bible

ishygddt diggity

>>4397616
>implying youll ever get every reference a literary work makes
>implying you have to have read the bible to be able to identify most biblical allusions

>>4396900
Not really. Have you read Songs of Innocence/Songs of Experience? There is very little biblical allusion present there. Not that you could read all of his oeuvre without some biblical knowledge but Jesus you don't need to have written the thing to get some of Blake's work.

>>4397631

Spare me your excuses for avoiding one of the pillars of Western literature, you non-reader.

>>4397644
PLS DONT CALL ME A NON READER PLS ANON I PROMISE ILL READ THE BIBLE

>>4397647

>nerve hit
>tries to mask it with sarcasm and caps

Good, good.

>>4397644
>pillars of Western literature
toppest lel
Pillar of Wester literary or historical influence, maybe, but not literature.

>>4397651
NOO WIKI PSYCHOLOGY MY ONLY WEAKNESS

>>4397659

>still riled

Good, good.

>>4397665
AWRHGHGHGHGGGG

>>4397183
That fellow didn't use the word "fag" on Four Chan, did he? Good heavens, what was he thinking, the poor soul?

I love everything about this thread and all that it's spawned

>>4396782
>at party
>talk with humanities major
>ask "What are you going to do after uni?"
Why is it this always cuts the conversation so shot?

>>4397732
it's a dead end man, trap door, we fucked up!!!

>>4397732
>talking about academic subject
>move conversation to how one is going to monetize it rather than discussing the artistic depth of the field

stay bourgeois

I'm thinking we introduce /v/ to Bible.
>>/v/224048083

this thread makes me really fucking sad and is a perfect summation of this lethargic generation.
> hurr a scholar has already done the work of reading and understanding
> implying knowledge is something that doesn't need personal reflection
> implying sparknotes has academic merit
>implying mentally cataloging works of literature for conversational posturing after skim reading makes you a legitimate intellectual rather than an ADHD riddled internet addict who has no independent thought
Stay winning OP, fuck the plebs in this thread

>>4396782
>Sure they're good... but other authors wrote shit too
Why do you think it's necessary for everyone to have read exactly what you have, then?

Sofia Tolstoy isn't widely read and it's not strange at all that someone wouldn't know about her memoirs.

You sound like a pseudointellectual piece of shit.

>>4396906
But he's right you tards

Most of this fucking thread
Holy shit guys
You're all idiots

>>4397132
>You don't think the bible is necessary when it comes to picking up biblical allusions? That's nonsense.
Having knowledge of the Bible is useful but reading it from back to front isn't needed

Unless you're a past christian or have strong knowledge then yeah

Also, lol this thread is still here

>>4397858

I find it amusing that most of the younger people in the "New Atheism" movement, for all their faux veneration of the intellect, use the movement as an excuse to further anti-intellectualism in the humanities.

But there always needs to be a subset of the ignorant in order to establish the discrepancy between subset of the informed. So their mediocrity is unfortunate, but necessary.

>>4397875
lol no one fucking cares, you dork.

this whole thread has basically been trolls trolling one guy, and then you and >>4397858
jesusfreak here decide to go all heavy and philosophical and shit.

>>4397889
>heavy and philosophical
More like autistic

>>4397889

>lol no one fucking cares, you dork.

He says while angrily replying.

If you're going to get asspained at least try to pretend like you aren't, lol.

>>4397875
No one said anything at all about atheism/religion all thread.

>>4397889
>Jesus freak

I'm the guy who posted that image and I don't believe in a god.

>>4397889
>decide to go all heavy and philosophical and shit.
>doesn't even know what the words he uses mean

I just entered this thread and am promptly closing it not to get caught in the general shitstorm, but goddamn, /lit/, goddamn.

>>4396912

This post is stupid. "Well-adjusted people" wouldn't lie and pretend to care about things that other people actually are passionate about. OP is passionate about reading and wouldn't have had a problem if they admitted they didn't read much, but they lied and tried to pass it off as if they did read a lot. Maybe he has plenty to talk about, but like everybody, he has a few passions that he can REALLY talk about and is disappointed when people lie about being able to talk about it.

what godawful parties are some of you going to where discussing literature would be off limits?

You can't be mad at them for not reading the same amount of books they do.

are you gonna be mad at me if I drink water through a water bottle, and you only drink with a glass cup?

>>4397900

>No one said anything at all about atheism/religion all thread.

An entire thread about the importance of The Bible is not at all being related to religion? You're really saying that religion hasn't been part of this discussion for "all" the thread?

Wow. You're a legitimate moron.

>>4397916

why would you think an analogy that shit would be worth posting

>>4397924
>An entire thread about the importance of The Bible is not at all being related to religion?

No, it's fucking not, if you don't read it that way. It's at core a very important historical text, rich in stories and messages, which happens to be the basis of a religion.

If you can't separate both aspects and think they both must be intrinsically related, then you're fucking retarded.

>>4397898
just cause i wrote 'fuck' doesn't mean i'm angry. i'm cool ice, babe, i'm vinnie barbarino and the fonz rolled into one. up your nose with a rubber hose.

maybe it's just that you haven't read the bible and thus can't pick up on the nuances and allusions and references in my post.

>>4397905
but you have at least read the bible, right?

>>4397915
It's just insecure people that don't want others to find out anything they do or like just in case someone doesn't like it and have to stand up for themselves.

>>4397947
>being this buttflustered because he can't read a book that takes a couple of weeks tops to complete

It's fine, you can go back to making Tao Lin threads, I'm sure that's infinitely deeper than the bible.

>>4397906
don't let the floor hit you on the way out, ace.

>>4397936

Separating both aspects is important, but it must also be conflated through the lens of context to get a full understanding of the topic.

Ultimately it turned into a thread about religion whilst being one that isn't.

>It's fine

is it?

>you can go back to making Tao Lin threads

can i?

>I'm sure that's infinitely deeper than the bible.

you think?

you wouldn't happen to be the original guy who got trolled hard, would you? i mean the lack of perception and awareness is incredible. read the bible you pleb.

>>4397947
Yes, I have read the bible.

>>4396999
the bible only contains part of the torah

>>4397014
because those characters are sort of "what I thought about this other story: the story"

>out at a party
>lots of university students there
>someone asks if you've read a certain book
>you have but you didn't understand it well enough
>pretend you've never even heard of it
>person looks a little disappointed and makes small talk before moving on to someone else
>you spend the rest of the night feeling embarrassed and ashamed, hoping that your ride decides to leave soon

i've studied literature at princeton for two years and not a single one of my teachers has read the bible front to back.

also, there does not exist one piece of "good" literature that depends on biblical or historical allusions for a full comprehension of the story. the point of a book is the book itself and what it is trying to show you.

it's like saying you can't appreciate the sistine chapel because you don't know the names of the apostles.

>>4398187
>i've studied literature at princeton for two years

>>4398188
Don't listen to this mollywop

>>4398200
tell em J

people dont read anymore

were entering a new age of how we transfer information

sorry


read taipei by tao lin

>>4398188
LOL UNIVERSITIES AMIRITE

>>4398187
>name-dropping your undergraduate institution in order to add weight to your argument

lol

Let me tell you something. No-one is impressed, and in fact everyone's opinion of you only goes down when you make use of such a pretentious tactic.

Money can buy even the most mediocre mind a place in the Ivy League, because money buys private tutors, and expensive private tutors can polish even the most mediocre mind into a key that turns the lock on the gate.

Of course, maybe you aren't one of those mediocre minds who rode the wave of daddy's cash into a prestigious university. But there's no way for us to know.

I study English lit at uni and there is a worrying proportion of people on the course who read very little... and the ones who do read a lot is never who you expect. The cute hipster girl with the glasses and the copy of Jane Eyre sticking out of her bag? Yeah, she don't read shit. But the built Irish guy in sweatpants and a tee-shirt falling asleep at the back of the lecture theatre who gets wasted every time he gets the opportunity? He reads. It always seems to be the people on the course who fit the course stereotype the least, that actually care about the subject the most.

>>4398305
>being surprised that the built Irish guy reads

pic related

Also people like that hipster chick who take care to display their reading material to everyone around them like strutting peacocks are exactly my stereotype of people who don't actually read.

>>4398332
forgot pic

>>4398305
I wish I were Irish, maybe then I could understand Joyce better

>>4397132
>Most autists find enjoyment in fully understanding a text
FTFY

>>4397875
New atheists emphasize reading the bible because they see it as a tool for de-conversion, because it's that bad. I should know, because I am one.

>>4397627

>>4398458

>spends time on a literature board declaring his lack of interest in actually understanding literature

Go and take your insecurities elsewhere.

>>4398485

>New atheists emphasize reading the bible because they see it as a tool for de-conversion

A few of them do, yourself included I see, but the majority of them don't. They see it as not even worth being read. Which is all well and good, but when you claim to be a serious reader of Western lit, then there is a problem.

Still, the truly hilarious group are Christians who not only haven't read it but see it as an actual inconvenience to their lives do so.

>>4397118
Damn dude where do you think we are? How can we live with ourselves if we can't feel superior over trivial matters?

>>4398491
if a book is good enough, it'll appeal to you regardless of whether or not you've read all the material influencing it. not understanding emotions and how a text can provoke them and having to resort to just simply reading everything the author has is classic autist in my eyes

>>4397118

>Ask the feminist probing questions about her feminism.

This always ends badly. No matter how well-versed in the topic you are or calm you remain while discussing it they'll play the victim card and you'll be seen as an asshole.

You will almost never see a feminist in discussion with a man about feminism saying something along the lines of "that's interesting, I've never considered looking at it like that".

They won't debate you, most don't even see men as being warranted an opinion on the matter, no matter how reactionary or flawed their logic is. They will turn it into arguing for sport. You are a social obstacle and they have something to prove to you. This is 99% of feminists going in to the discussion of feminism with a man.

I know this is verging on /r9k/ levels of generalization, but it's fairly accurate.

>>4398506
>Still, the truly hilarious group are Christians who not only haven't read it but see it as an actual inconvenience to their lives do so.

This reminds me of a man-shaped effigy fashioned out of straw. Curious.

>>4398530

>if a book is good enough, it'll appeal to you regardless of whether or not you've read all the material influencing it.

Sensibilities grow alongside erudition.

You have a naive understanding of the matter.

>>4398452
Even if you were Joyce you wouldn't understand Joyce better

>>4398553
wow what a vapid response

>>4398593
Joyce is a hack.

hahaha op u have autism lmao

>>4396940
This. I see this same kind of mentality in people I know. It all finds its roots in them just lashing out at mommy, daddy, and/or god (real or not), and it only makes them come across as the childish, "lol Christians r so dum" type of atheists (and, no, I'm not saying all atheists are this way).

>>4396989
(like them or not)
Tolkien
And all of his copy-cats
Lewis
And all of his copy-cats

>>4398623
I thought I was the only person who browses /lit/ who thinks that.

>>4398647
I thought a ton of people thought that on /lit/
I really like Joyce though

>>4398647
You are far from the only one.

Oh my God, what a terrible thread. This just goes from bad to worse. I regret checking out /lit/ tonight because I was subjected to this. OP is a huge fucking nerd.

>>4398693
You kidding? This is one of my favorite /lit/ threads in a long time

>>4398613

>wow what a vapid response

Heh, this damage control is cute and all but it's time for you to bow out.

>>4398543
Ideology on the decline

>>4397889
>Jesus freak
>mfw this is literally my family heritage: Godspell-style
>mfwihnf

>>4396863
i read dante without reading the bible
some copies of it have a summary in them that describes what happens for each canto in case the reader doesn't know some of the references or didn't understand some archaic speech.
reading milton is like reading the bible's fan fiction or something
i never got far innit

so i suppose if you read the entire bible and actually liked the boring parts you could read milton

>>4397010

You make it sound as if Dostoyevsky is just a fanatic ripping of bible stories to make us all praise the glory of jesus.

>>4398340
Look at how much heavy shit I lift, i'm so fucking productive, the earth gets excited at the look of muh muscles and is oh so fucking fertile

>>4396972
>lives in east Tn
You hurt my feelings. ;(

>>4398340
shit...

>>4396977
The Torah is the first five books of the bible

welcome to the 21st century

People are seriously maintaining that the bible isn't important re western literature? Good grief lit...

>>4402301
Seriously. How can they understand all the allusions? I'm with you on this one

>>4396782
The problem op is that the smartest people rarely go into humanities anymore. And the few smart kids that go quickly get alienated by that shit and run away.

>>4402317

Don't criticize what you can't understand my mocking friend. You sound pretty damn stupid and you're just wrong to maintain that the Bible isn't one of many important texts in the western canon.

>>4396912
Too many people try to excuse their faults by saying "I'm a well-adjusted person".

But face it, in our alienated society being a well-adjusted person means being a loser.

>>4402329
I was agreeing with you. Maybe you didn't get what I was alluding. You should really pick up the bible more often.

>>4397009
I think op wants to find companions and not masters. A community of scholars and not adoring subjects. And I understand him, I often am frustrated how little passionate people studying these subjects are compared to how much they are paying.

>>4399062
>so i suppose if you read the entire bible and actually liked the boring parts you could read milton

>/lit/