/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11302074]

> Fischer argues that “until the late 19th century when the French and Russians came in and made the novel the premier vehicle for the expression of the soul, the novel always had something of light entertainment about it. It wasn’t seen as serious literature till you got to Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy and Flaubert.” And to each action, a reaction. Perhaps until the novel started being serious there wasn’t any need for the Comic Novel as a distinct entity.

>Novels weren't taken seriously as an artform until Tolstoy

this can't be correct, maybe I'm just being a brainlet but weren't there plenty of deep novelists before then?

[Anonymous No.11302080]

Flaubert is where it all started, senpai

[Anonymous No.11302111]

Not really. Novels were seen as middle to low brow cheap entertainment after the establishment of the Guttenberg Galaxy.

[Anonymous No.11302157]

What about the Brontes or Jane Austen?

[Anonymous No.11302164]

Novels were for brainlets until the Russians wrote doorstoppers which brainlets couldn't consume

[Anonymous No.11302220]

>>11302164
>Russians save the novel from the brainlets
>Russians save Christianity from the brainlets
>Russians save cinéma from the brainlets
>Russians save politics from the brainlets
based Mommy Russia

[Anonymous No.11302243]

The novel wasn't really an artform until Joyce.

[Anonymous No.11302246]

>>11302243

>what is Dostoevsky

[Anonymous No.11302325]

>>11302074
Yeah, that's quite late, I'd say that the novel was gaining very strong foothold in the hierarchy already with romanticism and Goethe's Werther.

[Anonymous No.11302347]

>>11302074
yes poetry was seen as more highbrow

[Anonymous No.11303461]

Fischer thread anyone?