/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13104340]

Is this the most pseud shit ever? It has all the common pseud points: It has academic support but not many people IRL have read it. It's a 2000 year old text, but accessible. You can brag that you've read a "classic". You can look intellectual by reading not only poetry, but EPIC poetry on the train. It's quite really one of the best pseud cred books i've ever seen, perhaps only outshined by Camus and Dostoevsky. I only see the absolute bottom of the barrell pseud trash talking about this shit.
But i guess the real problem is that the book itself has no real merits. We now know that there wasn't a poet Homer, collector of oral traditions or anything, but rather, a bunch of Aristocratic pseuds writing and reciting it generation to generation. The result is a collected mess of a story, and a lack of stylistic rigor. For example, book 10 is obviously not meant to be part of the story. It shows the Greeks having a victory (which makes no sense since they don't win anything until Achilles comes back, and the whole premise of the story is to tell about how the Greeks suffered so much because of Achille's anger), it shows Ulysses behaving inconsistently (killing a man for no real reason), and it's set at night, which almost never occurs again (since the glory of the battle, as Homer himself says, is raged on by the day, with the "shining bronze blinding the line of the Acheans"). It's simply a pathetic joke, and one of the most laughable pieces of literature i've ever read. In the end, half of this "poem" is spent repeating a variation of
>Warlike X killed wealthy Z, son of compassionate Y
>And then Agammenon speared X, son of Z, and black blood flowed from his mouth
>And then Hector sent down to Hades B, son of divine A...
The only good books are 1,3, 9, 23, 24 with the rest being a complete mess. "Homer" was literally forgotten until the renaissance with the greek texts being reintroduced to the western world again, though he was known and quite simply ignored by the middle ages, outshined by the superior VIRGIL. Really, is there a more pathetic book than this?

[Anonymous No.13104366]

>>13104340
>Dostoevsky
Dostoevsky is top tier pseud nothing can beat him

[Anonymous No.13104446]

The Art of War is the most pseud book. At least Homer and Dostoevsky are 500+ pages, so not every normie will attempt to read them. The Art of War is a pamphlet and essentially says common sense.

[Anonymous No.13104532]

>>13104340
How much did the Trojans pay you to post this?

[big gay No.13104549]

>>13104340
>UI*sses instead of ODYSSEUS
you cuck

[Anonymous No.13104604]

I don't usually say this but there's a lot of projection in the first part of your post and the rest reads like you didn't "get" it. Try reading Pope's translation.

[Numen !!GgBWHLRiayD No.13105020]

"Iliad" is based on actual historical individuals and events. Its narratization was inspired by the electromagnetic contacts with Mars and their aftermaths that transcurred in seventh and eighth centuries BCE.

[Anonymous No.13106040]

>>13104604
yeah smart ass, explain to us please how OP didn't "get it", and what is there to "get" huh

[Anonymous No.13106068]

>>13106040
Well for one I don't understand why he thinks Odysseus killing Dolon was inconsistent behavior.

[Anonymous No.13106075]

>>13104340
>claims The Iliad is a work for pseudo intellectuals because it accessible
>clearly didn't understand it on even the most basic levels
>justifies his unimpressive tirade with pop-history truisms
embarrassing

[Anonymous No.13106080]

>lack of styalistic rigor
fucking moron
learn the greek then read the greek fuckwad
>all in dactylic hexameter
>claims it’s not rigorous

[Anonymous No.13106083]

There may be many pseuds talking about it but the book is by no means pseud.
It never pretends to be more than it is, it doesn't try to be "deep" or is deliberately obtuse.
It originated from an oral poetic tradition not from some XX century pseud.
If it is talked about a lot it is because it was very important to the western literary tradition.

[Anonymous No.13106087]

>>13106040
Why should anyone spoonfeed you? It's the height of inanity to try and repay trash with effort or meaning. All that's left to say and that could be understood here is that you're wasting your time.

[Anonymous No.13106089]

>>13104340
This is a troll post. You hate the fact that large chunks are listing of person x kills person y son of z, but claim book 1 as your one of your favorite books, which is literally a CATALOG OF SHIPS!

[Anonymous No.13106096]

>and it's set at night, which almost never occurs again (since the glory of the battle, as Homer himself says, is raged on by the day, with the "shining bronze blinding the line of the Acheans"
You do know that night raids have always been a part of war, right?

[Anonymous No.13106098]

>>13106087
>spouts trash after trash
>gets called on it
>lol dude i'm way too superior for arguments, they're for nerds
come on nigger, this kinda of behavior gets old really fast. i doubt you're older than 18

[Anonymous No.13106106]

>>13104340
>best books
>doesn’t mention book 18
Okay I’m guessing you haven’t actually read it

[Anonymous No.13106112]

>>13104340
>outshined by the superior VIRGIL.
based and virgilpilled

[Anonymous No.13106113]

>>13106106
desu i don't really remember what book 18 is about since i've read this a few months ago, but i'd bet is Achilles vs Hector. Book 3 was fantastic though, especially that scene in which Helen and some other people are in a wall seeing the battle from above and pointing out heroes and telling their backstories

[Anonymous No.13106154]

Swine, pearls.

[Anonymous No.13106194]

>not mentioning book 5 and 6

[Anonymous No.13106202]

>>13104340
>whereas I, a REAL intellectual..
Why are people on this board so obsessed with "pseuds", who is and isn't one and clarifying that they, themselves, are certainly not one? To me this betrays some deep seated nagging insecurity and a pathological fixation on status. Some might call it narcissism. It is certainly a defensive cover for something ghastly and hollow.
I am happy that people read literature at all.

[Anonymous No.13106209]

>>13106089
That's book two

[Anonymous No.13106213]

>>13104340
the real "pseud shit" is pretending that you read a book when you only read a translation i.e. you haven't actually read it

[Anonymous No.13106214]

>>13106202
It's not only a lit thing, this happens all across 4chan. One reason is that it gets more replies, another one is that people here want to distance themselves from normies.

[Anonymous No.13106223]

This might be the best thread on Homer in quite a while. OP is stirring some shit, making multilayered bait, but almost nobody is actually getting it. The replies are so retarded they could pass for bait themselves. Dumb fucks, all of you, you don't deserve to enjoy Homer (or Vergil).

[Anonymous No.13106227]

>>13106209
You're right. I'm wrong.

[Anonymous No.13106234]

>>13106227
Nerd

[Anonymous No.13106258]

>>13106223
>say something retarded but don't actually mean it
>people call you retarded
>haha no i was just playing guys fooled you
these threads are multilayerd cringe

[Anonymous No.13106263]

>>13106213
>>13106214
>One reason is that it gets more replies,
I suppose people are mortified of being a phony. Even (or especially?) in this day where appearance is everything and we accept that we live in world of lies and illusion. Also, in a community of people brought together by something like literature, many people probably define themselves by their erudition. To call this into question is an assault on their sense of self. A sad situation.

[Anonymous No.13106266]

>>13106258
is there anything that isn't cringe nowadays? honestly 4chan is and always was, pretty fucking cringe

[Anonymous No.13106270]

>>13106266
It's definitely not, my m8's and I always make 4chan jokes afk.

[Anonymous No.13106279]

>>13104340
It's interesting for historical, literary, and anthropological reasons. Even if you don't enjoy it, it's a great window into traditional Greek values and shows us their gold standard before the dramatists and philosophers shuffled things around a bit. You can read it for this reason, then, but it's also entertaining as a story by itself so long as you have some patience for the dull segments. Modern entertainment has Lord of the Rings, The Avengers, and certain anime for epic battles, but while those have better pacing, they lack the literary quality, the epic scale, good character development (go reread the Iliad if you don't believe me), and cultural/historical importance which puts the Iliad ahead. Plus it was the first.

What people should really remember about Homer is that, so long as you have patience, his works really surpass a ton of modern authors trying to do the same thing.

[Anonymous No.13106280]

>>13106266
Popeposting pure and simple
>>13106270
cringe

[Anonymous No.13106305]

>>13104340
>We now know that there wasn't a poet Homer

[Anonymous No.13106663]

>>13105020
Nigga what are you even talking about

[Anonymous No.13106685]

I just got this

[Anonymous No.13106689]

>>13104340
anyone who reads homer without a prior strong interest in ancient greece is a philistine moron youre looking at a pinnacle of human achievement and a miracle of cultural record ans that would be very clear if you didnt read "classics" just for a list- you are the pseud

[Anonymous No.13106692]

>>13104532
underrated

[Anonymous No.13106711]

>>13106685
I have this set. Have read iliad and odyssey thus far, both excellent

[Anonymous No.13106716]

>>13106689
>>13104340
>>13106040
>>13106223

its very conditions of existence and quala preclude it from the same literary criticism you would level at an individual civic contriver like virgil, and this goes out to anyone judging it postively or negatively on criterion of 'plot' or development you are completely missing the point and clearly cant contextualize it as a text, its annoying to even see; this really isnt for you so please stick to the novels on whatever list you saw homer on

[Anonymous No.13106788]

>>13104340
OP it's one of the oldest books ever written. How can you not process the historical, cultural and seminal context. This was poetry and literature before it ever existed. Meditate on that. Homer was like the Elon Musk of today, if Musk was 100x as significant.

You gave some personal opinions so let me offer some of mine
>you don't read greek
>you don't read poetry
>cannot appreciate the major importance of the ancient greek myths (this was their religion)
>you are very young
>if forced to write a book or even a short story it would be tremendously, horrifically worse than this
>you'll eventually be truly content with the fact that you'll never find greatness (despite apparently being Homer's superior), and live a forgettable life

[Anonymous No.13106840]

>>13106716
>>13106788
fucking KEK these are some dumb posts., aesthetics is independant of cultural/historical/anthropological context. Homer's Illiad sucks ass AND balls; no amount of historical "context" will deny that fact. the text, aesthetically, is simply at fault, and its "importance" lies in historical "context", such as the rejection of the Latin middle ages (with the removal of the superior VIRGIL and Latin rhetoric) and the proeminence of the Greek tragedians (which to be fair, were far superior to everyone, and obviously to Homer). the fact is that no worthy poet has ever cared enough about Homer. the most famous poem about him is actually dedicated to a TRANSLATION, an Elizabethean translation, full of intentional errors and adulterations. Joyce recommended a PROSE version of the Odyssey, lmaaaaaaaaaaaao.

[Anonymous No.13106879]

>>13106840
My point just did a flyby. And yes context is very important, in all things, more especially in this case and dearly with art. The Illiad and Virgil aren't sports teams. Analogously it's like someone put the first classical piece ever recorded on a turntable and you're arguing that Miles Davis is better. Your opinions on its aesthetic nature are not only naive and irrelevant, the argument isn't interesting, thought provoking or intelligent. In fact it's bizarre.

[Anonymous No.13106904]

>>13104446
This fake deep literary equivalent of Live Love Laugh painted on a bedroom wall is probably the only book I can think of to out-pseud The Art Of War.

[Anonymous No.13106939]

When reading The Iliad, keep in mind that it was written by unconscious people. Makes a lot more sense.

[Anonymous No.13106958]

[Anonymous No.13107055]

>>13106904
That's a good one.

[Anonymous No.13107126]

>>13104340
which translation of virgil do I read anyway? mendelbaum? started dante but I think I should read him first

[Anonymous No.13107151]

>>13106939
Yeah they were on a whole different level of reality.

[Anonymous No.13107157]

>>13107126

i'm a classics student and i 100% recommend lattimore's translation

[Anonymous No.13107175]

>>13104340

you shouldn't read the illiad as an isolated text, you should read it with the aeneid, argonautica, odyssey, paradise lost and other epic poems as a wholly intertextual and cultural phenomenon

also why do u airquotes 'poem'? it's written in meter thus it's a poem

& if ur actually passionate about virgil read seamus heaney's translation in which he kept the meter in translation

[Anonymous No.13107182]

>>13104340
It is fine to read and enjoy.
It becomes pseud when you read 5 different translations of it or claim you reread it every year. Putting it on a pedestal is top tier pseud.
But the pseud par excellence is deep reading aristotle, like reading the parts not relevant to his metapychics philosophy

[Anonymous No.13107184]

>>13107151
Nah

[Anonymous No.13107190]

>>13107182

maybe i'm a massive pseud here but the illiad, aeneid etc all have such important different translations i don't understand why people wouldn't read it in more than one? the canon of western literature is based upon this story and yet for the majority of this board the most recent oxford world classics translation is fine?

[Anonymous No.13107278]

>>13104340
>outshined by the superior VIRGIL.
BASED

[Anonymous No.13107567]

>>13107175
How tf did Heany use quantitative verse in English?

>>13106879
>Analogously it's like someone put the first classical piece ever recorded on a turntable and you're arguing that Miles Davis is better.
Sounds completely agreeable. It was probably some simplistic monophonic stuff. Frankly your comparison is insulting towards Homer. Putting a work of art in context is impossible because the context is really only ours - limited to our knowledge and our worldview; it is really just an another story to contain the actual art, thus distracting from its immanent qualities. If we're judging by "who did it first", Gilgamesh is superior to Homer (and its characterization and philosophy legitimately are superior to Homer).
Are you >>13106788?

[Anonymous No.13107586]

? homer wasn’t ignored by the middle ages

[Anonymous No.13107592]

>>13107182
if you enjoy it why wouldn’t you reread it? and people enjoy shakespeare and we still all agree he’s the greatest

[Anonymous No.13107635]

>>13107586
? he was

[Anonymous No.13108051]

>>13105020
The Illiad represents the first race war between Nordics and Dinarics.

[Anonymous No.13108372]

>>13106266
>cringe

the word cringe is cringe by default

[Anonymous No.13108379]

>>13106788
>Homer was like the Elon Musk of today

[Anonymous No.13109584]

>>13107190
you're a retard if you think they were reading "translations". until the second half of the 20th century, any intelligent person would know their Greek and Latin, and at least 5 main European languages.

[Anonymous No.13110398]

>>13106840
I hope you find your way out of the place you are in one day, anon. You do not write or reason like someone of sound mind or judgment.

Or you're a 6/10 shitposter.

[Anonymous No.13110441]

>>13104340
This is what happens when a literal pseud who cares this much about posturing and lit cred cannot fathom that people would read books sincerely. What the fuck is wrong with this board?

[Anonymous No.13110449]

>>13109584
>at least 5 main European languages
where did you get that from?