/lit/ - Literature

Fuck I forgot the link
http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/11-07-2016/the-monday-extract-keats-is-dead-so-fuck-me-from-behind-by-hera-lindsay-bird/

Woah, so liberating

its fine

Rogue One is the most popular movie of 2016 on IMDB but who cares?

>>9416295

Is PC culture trying to destroy literature the way it has with movies, TV shows, comics and video games? I think the Nobel Prize shit with Dylan was the start of it but I could be wrong though. it seems like they can't sabotage real literature and will just keep producing commercialized shit like YA books to make retarded normies think they are some bookworms or shit like that.

It's like how the left tried to bandwagon on science a decade ago when being a nerd became the new, hip cool thing but they don't actually care about science and care more about the image of looking scientific or nerdy then capitalists realized nobody actually liked the idea smart is the new sexy so they scrapped that and just resorted to consumerism to appear smart. It's also a way for liberals and SJWs to crush collective individualism

>>9416317

Reminder IMDB's opinions are not valid

>>9416324
>Reminder IMDB's opinions are not valid
But this New Zealand online pop culture magazine's is?

Meh. Caught me a couple times, momentarily

>>9416295
Free of what?

>>9416324

It's already begun

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/19/us-students-request-trigger-warnings-in-literature
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/12/14/students-penn-remove-portrait-shakespeare
https://eidolon.pub/how-to-be-a-good-classicist-under-a-bad-emperor-6b848df6e54a
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/19/junot-diaz-attack-creative-writing-unbearable-too-whiteness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/men-explain-lolita-to-me_us_56741066e4b014efe0d50db1

>Relativistic arguments are arrayed only against the Western great books canon. If one’s deepest goals are political, one always has a major obstacle to deal with — the powerful books written by brilliant minds on the other side of the debate. . .Deconstruction allows you to dismiss whole literary and legal traditions as built upon sexist or racist or otherwise exploitative assumptions. It provides a justification for setting them aside.

>>9416324
You sound like you don't really engage with society on any meaningful level and as such your criticism of it is lacking.

>>9416383
Man I wish we would go back to a time when people would use 'deconstruction' correctly.

>>9416390
Indeed. Destruction would be a better term in this case.Or just ignorance.

>>9416295
>>9416298
>mfw it's actually really good

>>9416395
Nah.

>>9416397
Yeah there's really nothing wrong with it.

>>9416397

Enjoying it quite a bit, in retrospect

>>9416307
>its fine
that so hmm?
care to explain?

>>9416383
>when someone privileges speech over the written word near you

>>9416397
>mfw it's actually really good
yea anything seems good to you fags when any "authority" figure praises it

>>9416420
Do you ever get tired of posting this shit? How long have you spent on 4chan shitposting?

>>9416422
>Do you ever get tired of posting this shit?
do you ever get tired of deconstructionalism?

>>9416424
What is deconstructionalism?

>>9416427
Deconstruction as ideology.

>>9416295
Just like everything before, post modern art will finally have its day. Fortunately for us that day will one day come. Just maybe not in our life time.

>>9416431
What is deconstruction?

>>9416433
the opposite of construction

>>9416397
Help me out with this. What is she trying to do, bringing up all those dead romanticists? My first blush is that it's just a lame attempt to trigger people who revere them, but anyone who actually read any of those poets wouldn't give a shit. So that makes me think it's actually an even more cynical move, trying to cash in on facebook feminists who will retweet it because "lol dead white men." Which would be a shame if true, because I quite like the flow and the imagery of the schoolchildren walking and the shallow dead floating underneath contrasted with the almost uncomfortably raw sexual demands. But if they actually play some purpose that I'm missing, I'm all ears.

>>9416427
>>9416433
>>9416436
so deep; im cumming loads of shivering arrows as we speak

>>9416436
What is construction in a literary context?

>>9416439
Romanticism is dead.

>>9416383
>that article
>those comments
Of all sad words of tongue or pen, the saddest are these: /pol/ was right again.

>>9416449
>Romanticism is dead.
oh boy! a true literary genius! thanks again for taking the time to stop furiously masturbating to your reflection and to come join us on the good old forums!

>>9416458
Nice poem.

>>9416462
>Nice poem.
Thank You.

>>9416449
I was hoping it wasn't anything as shallow as all that. Postmodernism buried romanticism in much more irreverent fashion 50 years ago.

>>9416439
The TL;DR of the poem is she likes men, not brooding sensitive manchildren idolising the innocence of childhood. And she implies that men are back although she obviously hasn't browsed /lit/ or tumblr or your diary desu.

>>9416458
>Wow Keats, autumn is different to other seasons! Great insight.

>>9416466
>The TL;DR of the poem is she likes men, not brooding sensitive manchildren idolising the innocence of childhood.
why do people find this interesting

its honestly getting really tiring

>>9416468
>haha fucking ideologues, im so beyond that with my own ideology

>>9416465
It's not particularly shallow because my comment isn't the poem. Romanticism died 100 years before postmodernism in any case.

>>9416473
What are you talking about?

>>9416439
i would guess the poet has a better understanding of and engagement with the romantic poets than you do, and it would be helpful for you to give her this benefit of the doubt and read the poem again.

it's obviously meant to be shocking, and the way it drifts between elegy and graphic, very literal sexual scenes is really jarring. so then the question i why is it jarring, why is she evoking these male poets, coopting their style and then breaking it with her graphic, unromantic images.

i mean, there probably isn't an answer, but it makes me think about the way love and sex is stepped around by the romantic poets especially, how it is hinted at and treated with reverence, and how she disposes of this.

or she attempts to/wants to, but can't. she still gets stuck in the romantic, still falls back to indirect romantic language like "shivering arrows". it is not meant to just be shocking, it is evidence of a struggle that remains inconclusive.

>>9416466
I don't really think those things are mutually exclusive, but this is a better interpretation than the alternatives.

>>9416477
What?

>>9416466
this is a terrible reading of the poem btw

>>9416442
It could mean the constructing of a sentence, or a story, it could mean the construction of a genre. The clichés, influences and conventions that make it what it is now. Deconstruction carefully weighs and examines those conventions and takes them apart.

>>9416466
Another mixed signal in the farrago of choke-me-but-don't-suggest-i-trim-my-armpits-a-little-daddy fickle pudding.

>>9416483
>What are you talking about?
what are you?

>>9416439

Notes:

'Forced perspective' is what I got out of it. Meta-irony, anticipating the male reader, meeting him exactly where she expects to find him, his interest in her as a woman 'qua' woman i.e. another fuck-toy. Unsettles that perspective by making her own desire to be sexually objectified manifest AS desire. Suggestion that maybe the product of these other poets is a form of siblimation. Some imaginative- conceptual smearing of 'real poets/poetry', 'real(ist) object of art', 'gendered expectations of capacity', 'fucking', 'ultimate end of fucking', etc.

>>9416484

Good post.

>>9416488
>What?
what?

>>9416298
I bonered...

>>9416484
puhahahah, it is an awful poem you autist. is this what they teach you at uni? to find depth and meaning where there is none, so you can keep fueling (((their))) attack on high culture (turning culture into propaganda machinery, that is). that abomination should not even be called a poem, and to explain why it is worthless would be analogous to the explanation of why 2+2 is not 5. it is simply true, if you cannot see it without any backup theory you should neck yourself.

>>9416439
>>9416484
to elaborate on this, don't expected a coherent statement from a poem. like, why write a poem and not an essay? you want to try and communicate something subjective and intangible. this is not a universal rule of course, but it fits here.

not trying to suggest that poetry somehow exists outside of ideology. it doesn't. and this poem definitely doesn't. it is interacting with masculine ideas about feminine sexual desire and it runs up against a romantic view of sexual relations. but more than that i think it is about how the interplay of these ideologies and perspectives actually feel on an individual, subjective level.

>>9416509

What a way to shift the burden.

>>9416509
this is a trash post.
i don't especially like the poem, i read poems i like more every day. but if you read the poem as an attack on high culture you're an idiot who is too mired in ideology to read poetry.

>>9416509
You're silly. That's a very limited way to think. There's nothing wrong with ascribing meaning to something. There's nothing wrong with a generous interpretation.
It'll spare you a lot of "hurrrrr everything is shit" type of posting I imagine you do a lot of.

>>9416478
Poetry isn't reducible, but it also isn't above description. If your description reflects the intention, then I consider that aspect of the poem to be shallow.
>>9416484
Giving a poem the benefit of the doubt is total anathema to the subjectivity of poetry. It may be the case that I'll appreciate it more if I spend more time with the Romanticists, but holding my own interpretation hostage until such a time would defeat the purpose of reading it.

I don't find anything specifically lacking in your interpretation, but it still seems to me like well-trodden ground.
>>9416498
Now this is something I can work with.

>>9416514
>What a way to shift the burden.
hmmm just like in the poem

>>9416498
good reading.

>>9416509
>to find depth and meaning where there is none

True, there is no meaning in any text, my postmodern brother.

The name-dropping didn't achieve anything. The only "effective" part here was the dirty talk, and that only affected me in a stupid way. Sex is boring, stop using it, stop writing about it.

>>9416517

>You're an idiot for having your own interpretation

>>9416517
>>9416519
>>9416498
found the single 25+ likely overweight females

>>9416519
>If your description reflects the intention

I'm saying it doesn't.

>>9416528
>You're an idiot for having the interpretation of an idiot

>>9416519
>Giving a poem the benefit of the doubt is total anathema to the subjectivity of poetry
what are you talking about? you have to be willing to engage with a poem in order to read it. i don't suggest a preconceived notion that the poem is good, but you have to be willing to empathise to read poetry properly.

>>9416528
all interpretations are not equal. misinterpretations are bad.

>>9416527
sex is interesting and good.

When will we be free of bait threads?

>>9416531

>I'm the one who gets to distinguish an idiotic interpretation from a legitimate one, oh and I don't have to demonstrate that

>>9416534

>misinterpretations are bad.

Begging the question.


>sex is interesting and good.

Sex is not interesting and not good.

>>9416534
>all interpretations are not equal. misinterpretations are bad.
>the nature of poetry is subjectivity
>just not your own
autism.

>>9416536
>An interpretation that demonstrates nothing and attacks someone who does demonstrate an engagement with actual textual evidence in that interpretation is just as good -- if not better than -- that interpretation being attacked

"puhahahah, it is an awful poem you autist. is this what they teach you at uni? to find depth and meaning where there is none, so you can keep fueling (((their))) attack on high culture (turning culture into propaganda machinery, that is). that abomination should not even be called a poem, and to explain why it is worthless would be analogous to the explanation of why 2+2 is not 5. it is simply true, if you cannot see it without any backup theory you should neck yourself."

Outstanding! Publish this man!

>>9416534
>sex is interesting and good.
yes especially when every popular work is now about how liberated females are for having hairy armpits

>>9416536
to clarify, an interpretation clearly based on a misreading is worthless.
i'm not going to get mired in this reductive dissolution of meaning crap that prevents actual engagement with art.

>>9416543
i can't help but read these posts as the bitter ravings of the only losers of the sexual revolution. sad!

>>9416543
Name two.

>>9416298
>Eat my pussy from behind

I'm gonna fuck your asshole, cunt.

>>9416540

Fucking retard, off yourself

>>9416545

How do you distinguish a misreading from a good one? Stop dodging the question dumbass.

> sex is interesting and good

Grow up.

>>9416549
What is the point of the image? Also I see you're that same French anon who hates all contemporary poetry and loves Keats

>>9416549
>04:07am

Jesus.

>>9416549
i can't define it in a way either of us would be satisfied with socrates

>>9416545
>i can't help but read these posts as the bitter ravings of the only losers of the sexual revolution.
I cant help but read these posts as the bitter ravings of hopelessly single females who know their biological clock is relentlessly marching onward. sad!

>>9416555

Are you actually so braindead you can't tell that it demonstrates that I'm not the anon that posted this? >>9416509

1. Not French.

2. I don't hate all contemporary poetry (just a vast majority of it), and I love many more poets than just Keats.

>>9416562
I don't get the point of posts like these. So you're defining yourself as the opposition, it doesn't resolve anything.

>>9416295
I am not offended by this poem. In fact, it didn't elicit any strong emotional response from me. Boring/10

I really don't get why so many people here are sperging so hard over this poem.

>>9416295
go to bed hera
btw the poem's good, carry on

>>9416563
>Are you actually so braindead you can't tell that it demonstrates that I'm not the anon that posted this?

Maybe you should get some sleep. I'm not saying you're the same poster, but you're the one saying that interpretation is good.

>>9416568
There are like two people here sperging about it. Everyone else is at least ok with it.

>>9416566
>it doesn't resolve anything.
just like the ad hominem you posted. none of this ever resolves anything

>>9416568
Because it's another 'how edgy would it be if I mentioned fucking in my poem? Gosh I'm so completely original'

>>9416549

Do you get the office package free from your university? If you have to pay for it it's like a subscription now or some shit, such a fucking rip off.

>>9416571

I don't believe in interpretation theory (ie : Barthes tier shit), but I'm asking you questions to lead you somewhere.

>>9416577

I don't go to Uni yet, I work at a call center.

>>9416576
Is it? What makes this interpretation valid?

>>9416568
>it didn't elicit any strong emotional response from me. Boring/10
thats fine, i just dont think its "really good" like the people in the beginning of the thread had said
>it didn't elicit any strong emotional response from me
my problem was that it tried to do so on the cheap and it appears people fell for it.

>>9416581
So now you can go back to this post and try responding to it properly:

>>9416540

>>9416568
it's fun to talk about literature, this is a leisure activity

>>9416563
do you have a way to distinguish a valid interpretation from an invalid one, or are you saying it is an impossible task?

>>9416576
sex is not edgy, embarrassing

>>9416584
>it tried to do so on the cheap
what does this mean?

>>9416582
>What makes this interpretation valid?
what makes yours valid. fuck you.
can you be any more condescending you snide little cunt

youre not making yourself look intelligent by pretending to be an aloof asshole beyond responding to criticism

>>9416582
There's so many poems using graphic sexual imagery to create jarring images, that in the end it all feels like that's all they have going for them.

I see the contrast, but I think it's unnecessary and unpleasant to read - where's the beauty in 'keats is dead so fuck me from behind'? All you're left with is sex for the sake of being shocking and jarring

>>9416591
So you're saying no interpretation is valid?

>>9416588
>what does this mean?
do you lack basic reading comprehension or something?

>>9416588
Exactly - sex isn't edgy but people still think it's edgy to have it in poetry

>>9416592
You got as far as the title?

What's your opinion of pre-modern artists constantly reusing Christian and Greco-Roman subjects in art?

>>9416595
>So you're saying no interpretation is valid?
no

>>9416598
>Sex is included in poems to elicit the same reaction

Maybe your reading ability isn't up to par

>>9416599
>What's your opinion of pre-modern artists constantly reusing Christian and Greco-Roman subjects in art?
boring, just like your poem

>>9416605
You're saying all interpretations are valid? No? What are you saying?

>>9416599
Tired and done. Same with the tired old metaphors and similes using nature and the natural world. Modern society is mostly divorced from nature and it's just nostalgia that makes people use these still - people should be using the modern world instead.

>>9416587

I don't disagree with what you said there and I don't agree with whatever that guy posted outside of the general feeling of disgust. What I do disagree with though is the poem, what it stands for and what allows it to exist.

>>9416588

There is a concept known as intellectual honesty, fundamental to all discussion. What truly separates a finely crafted socratic dialogue from a youtube debate isn't the intellect of the debaters, but their honesty in dealing with their opponents and themselves.

I dismiss out of hand interpretations that are dishonest.

>>9416615
Using images from the modern world is just as tired. Why do you value innovation in poetry? Can one subject not be re-used in a different context to produce a different effect?

>>9416597
no, i was calling attention to your platitude and seeing if you had anything of substance behind it. what is it that makes it cheap? why is cheap bad? how could it approach things in a way that would not be cheap? you can just answer one if you'd like.

>>9416598
it is not edgy to write poetry about sex

>>9416615
>Modern society is mostly divorced from nature and it's just nostalgia that makes people use these still - people should be using the modern world instead.
wow did you write the poem?

>>9416618
>What I do disagree with though is the poem, what it stands for and what allows it to exist.

I don't think fiction has that great an effect on the world. What does the poem stand for?

>>9416619
It can be. But it's like emo – as much as I love it, how many times can you hear the same song before you get sick and need something new?

this is boring, no one is talking about the poem anymore.

>>9416634
lightweight

>>9416530
Then your post didn't answer my question.
>>9416534
Yes, of course you have to engage with poetry. My original post pointed out several facets of the poem that I enjoyed and appreciated, so I don't see where you would get the notion that I wasn't engaging with it. Though the fact that you feel that way does explain the "lol read it again," which is the literary equivalent of "git gud."

>>9416642
>This is boring no one is talking about the poem anymore
So fuck me from behind

Wow we write great poetry together!

>>9416549
>>9416563
>Being this French.
Fuck off you Bordeaux-sucking faggot.

>>9416548
Stick it up your own, asshole!

>>9416634
But still you can revisit old songs later in life.

Also I think contemporary poetry is 'inspired' by modern society. From postmodern poetry it is a reaction to modernist conceptions of poetry (and art in general) as self-contained objects divorced from artistic intent. Contemporary poetry is a kind of embodiment of nature despite modern society, where verses run according to natural speech, returning poetry to its origins as an oratory art.

>>9416623

Fiction has a gigantic impact on the world my friend. Simply think of the novel Sybil and how it generated by itself generated thousands of cases of multiple personality disorders and how it lead to the creation of the SSMPD in 1984, its add-on to the DSM in 1980 and so on...

Many cases ended up being proven as manufuctured...

Plato makes a clear case for the dangers of art. Art IS dangerous, extremely so. This poem is dangerous by virtue of what it allows (the desecration of classics, needless vulgarity...).

The poem itself is not that bad, but I have nothing but immense hatred for its subject matter

>>9416646
'So fuck me from behind' will probably be stuck in your head forever now. I saw this poem a while ago and I still recall that line for no real reason. It's an effective line.

This is what democracy leads to

>>9416655
>This poem is dangerous by virtue of what it allows (the desecration of classics, needless vulgarity...)

Not particularly dangerous to me but it's a matter of taste.

>>9416615
t. The kind of Angelino people in Michigan were thinking about when they voted for Trump

>>9416657
Not gonna lie, while I dislike the poem, I enjoyed the first line a bit. It definitely stays with you

>>9416658
The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.

>>9416666

Look anon, most nights at around 3 AM I go to take a walk outside and I like to take in the scenery. Giant firs, endless black skies, mottled green-yellow grass still wet from freshly thawed snow and cold winds are the things honing my aesthetic sensibilities.

When I'm back from these walks, and it's 4:00 AM, and I see yet another poem like this one, I just cannot feel anything but disgust despite the poet not being a total hack.

What would compel someone to write this?

What kind of bottom-tier esthetic ideals do you need to have to have your heart flutter at such a poem?

You can't claim it's stimulating the intellect either...

>>9416655
I never thought I'd see a post on 4chan arguing against needlessly vulgarity and desecrating classics.

Needless to say, I think your opinion deserves to have a great heaping stinking pile of shit mounded onto it. With hairs in it and stuff.

>>9416689

Well fuck you too

>>9416695
This guy: >>9416689
makes a good point, anon. If you use Plato as a reference, too, you are going to run into problems. Think about the next dialogue chronologically after the dialogue you used. You know that much about Plato, actually?

>>9416695
John Keats took shits, too, my man.

>>9416686
I find things not interesting for their own sake but because of their contexts. I wouldn't walk outside at 3am in the hopes that I can see nature and that nature would inspire me to write about nature. I want to see everything. I want to look past the trees, to structures of houses, through people's mail, to things on the sidewalk and to walk down paths just to see where they could go. These things are new to me but possibly old and tired to someone else. This poem is not specifically constructed and composed because composition imposes limits, it represents rather than presents. The imagination is meaningless. I'm more interested in what is.

>>9416295

Passable imagery, terrible music.

>>9416700
You mean like Endymion?

>>9416678
What's really interesting about this Butler quote, what really blows me the fuck away about it, is that it's actually very simple and mundane what she's saying (if you know anything at all about French postwar philosophy, like basic familiarity), and if can thereby see the sentence CONTENT as mundane, the STRUCTURE of it is just incredibly fucking poorly written and tortuous.

It's a really fucking simple sentence that she needlessly confuses and bloats as much as possible. It always reminds me of an undergraduate essay. Undergraduates always do shit like that.

>>9416705
I mean he squatted down and strained and produced big fucking turds and then wiped the rest of the shit out from his ass

He also wrote poems

Did a lot of things

>>9416700

He sure did, and so do I. I'm pretty sure Keats, too, believed that the '' holiness of the Heart's affecion and the truth of Imagination'' as well as his belief in the ''consummate power of poetry'' was not to be found in description of getting fucked from behind.

It's not like I'm totally alergic to vulgarity (ie : rimbaud, rabelais, etc...), but I strongly believe that our holiest achievments are mostly free from vulgarity.

>>9416699

Not sure what you're referring to here

>>9416711
>Contact
He shouldn't have done so many shits, girls don't like that shit.

>>9416719
Have you read Bakhtin? Because Bakhtin is obviously interesting - and I think broadly right - if you're going to be talking about holiness and vulgarity, and heck you actually specifically mentioned Rabelais already.

Anyway, regardless of Bakhtin, it's my belief that being too attached to the forms of the classics and treating them with reverence does more harm than good. I don't think reverence is the correct attitude.

>>9416723

For various reasons anon, I cannot have a balanced view where I maintain a critical view of classics while giving them the respect that they deserve (and especially after reading them).

I have to pick between perhaps unjustified reverence and the exact opposite. No way I will ever consider the second option.

Someone needs to defend the canon.

And it's not like most of the authors are hard to defend or anything.

>>9416295
She has writing talent, but the poem is shit.

Just another 'le edgy female sexuality' meme.

>>9416752
Why is it edgy? By that token the Katie thread is full of 'le edgy male sexuality' memes.

Keats is dead so fuck me from behind

Slowly and with carnal purpose

Some black midwinter afternoon

While all the children are walking home from school

Peel my stockings down with your teeth

Coleridge is dead and Auden too

Of laughing in an overcoat

Shelley died at sea and his heart wouldn’t burn

& Wordsworth……………………………………………..

They never found his body

His widow mad with grief, hammering nails into an empty meadow

Byron, Whitman, our dog crushed by the garage door

Finger me slowly

In the snowscape of your childhood

Our dead floating just below the surface of the earth

Bend me over like a substitute teacher

& pump me full of shivering arrows

O emotional vulnerability

Bosnian folk-song, birds in the chimney

Tell me what you love when you think I’m not listening

Wallace Stevens’s mother is calling him in for dinner

But he’s not coming, he’s dead too, he died sixty years ago

And nobody cared at his funeral

Life is real

And the days burn off like leopard print

Nobody, not even the dead can tell me what to do

Eat my pussy from behind

Bill Manhire’s not getting any younger

>>9416789
Why is every contemporary female poet using this style

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/detail/57572

>>9416752
>he sees female sexuality as edgy

>>9416789

>Life is real

WRONG
R
O
N
G

''Our life is no dream, but it should and will perhaps become one'' - Novalis

>>9416804

If ''fuck me in the ass'' is supposed to represent the pinnacle of female aesthetic ideals of sex, I think I'm going to move on to ayyyy lmao women

>>9416816
actually, life is real. the idea that temporality is incompatible with reality is dumb as fucking shit.

>>9416298
That was really good.

Romanticism is gay.

>>9416824

It seems that I've struck a nerve.

Mad that I won't allow you to reduce human experience to shit and anal sex?

>>9416719
>Not sure what you're referring to here
Socrates said it in a dialogue by Plato. We shouldn't really assume that is what Plato himself actually thought.

>>9416816
>he thinks fuck me from behind means fuck me in the ass

>>9416834

Not an argument

>>9416789

you know, this really isn't bad

>>9416719
>truth of Imagination

Nothing has contributed so much to the alienating and destructive forces of modernism more than the imagination.

>>9416838
i wasn't making an argument i was poking fun :-)
it's a v embarrassing thing to think

>>9416816
>''fuck me in the ass'' is supposed to represent the pinnacle of female aesthetic ideals of sex

What does that have to do with the poem? Don't get ahead of yourself.

>>9416832
that's not really the gravamen of my complaint, although I certainly do think that shit and anal sex are both real elements of the human experience

>>9416832
>muh poopoos and peepees

>>9416842

> the alienating and destructive forces of modernism

:(

>>9416848
>>9416846
>>9416843
>>9416845

>>9416832
maybe not anal sex, but sex in general yes, at least that's mostly the goal on most humans minds, whether you want to accept that or not.

>>9416875

Factually incorrect, whether you want to accept that or not.

>>9416884
you think sex isn't the goal on most peoples minds? I'm not saying it should be the goal of humans or humanity but that people buy things and do things mostly to attract someone for sex

>>9416298
this is a cheap ripoff of This Is Serious Mum's song "the TISM nightsoil cart and horse blues", which ends with the band singing "Fuck me from behind" over and over.

https://genius.com/Tism-the-tism-nightsoil-cart-and-horse-blues-lyrics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWbxH2zWvlw

>>9416875
>>9416884
>>9416889
Sex doesn't have to be the goal of human beings generally to be a real part of human existence, which is a real thing

>>9416892
Don't disagree, but it is the main goal for most people at this point in time.

I was stalking gary fisketjon at some point last year (i stalk great editors, occasionally) when i came across an article about this young woman and some of her poems. I was mildly impressed. She really does have a fresh way with language, a poetic cleverness and restraint beyond whatever popularity she has so far achieved. I read the ten or so poems available at large at the time and that was it. At this stage of the game she's solid, good.

>>9416615
The modern world gets old pretty fast. Enjoy putting the word facebook on your poems.

>>9416384
This, holy shit.
Actually most of the posts in this vein sound like half cooked up fantasies through concepts and generalizations that don't really apply to the world outside the internet. Makes you wonder if they realize how sheltered they sound

>>9416295
>most popular
yeah because most popular x haven't usually been shit for ages right
>>9416324
>destroy video games
>there was something of value to be destroyed

>>9416651
I'm gonna fuck YOU from behind
For the good o'mankind
Although not very bright
You're a tight white knight
I'm a master of wit
And you don't deserve my pit
You gotta a cock to suck
You gotta shave you armpit

>>9416298

>>9416514
>>9416517
>>9416518
>Keats is dead so fuck me from behind
The very first verse disqualifies that horrendous piece of text from being a poem. If this shallow idiocy even vaguely resembles poetry in your spirit, you ought to stop reading (and leave /lit/ as well).

There were a couple poems written like that in Romanticism, they inserted similar vulgar imagery.
However, they were written mostly in jest, as a form of a parody and a protest. Holding this poem up as actually meaningful is what is blatantly stupid, and what puts off the people in this thread. The poem hold little to no value.

>>9417148
Does that line make you uncomfortable?

>>9416298
>>9416295
Couldn't find time or rhyme for Tennyson, eh you kiwi slut?

>>9416298
>>9416295
Couldn't find time or rhyme for Tennyson, eh you kiwi slut?

>mfw Idylls of the King is only MAYBE taught in overpriced college classes attended by faggots who self-selected for career extinction AND Rupi Kaur and shit like OP are popular.

>>9416777
Of course it is - you say that like it isn't.

>>9416804
>he/she/it can't into reading comprehension

>>9416384
Don't worry goy, nothing is going on! Marxists hell-bent on destroying the West haven't infiltrated every pore of your society. Only basement dwelling white supremacists believe in conspiracy theories, your society is THRIVING! TRUST ME!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/04/22/students-avoid-making-eye-contact-could-guiltyof-racism-oxford/