[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 57 KB, 576x436, 1562036327973.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13546697 No.13546697 [Reply] [Original]

who is the greatest of the greatest, /lit/?
>Homer, Dante, or Shakespeare?
>Michelangelo, Raphael, or Rembrandt?
>Bach, Mozart, or Beethoven?

>> No.13546709

>>13546697
I have never read, seen or heard any of these. Probably boring old white male shit anyway.

>> No.13546727

>>13546697
Archilochus
Vermeer
Wagner

>> No.13546734

>>13546697
Shakespeare was the best writer though he has nothing on par with the DC or Homer's epics.

Rembrandt for sure.

Bach is arguably the most important but Mozart had the most pure talent. It is really too bad he died young.

>> No.13546739

Shakespeare, Rembrandt, Mozart.

>> No.13546751

Homer, Michelangelo, Beethoven is objectively the correct answer.

>> No.13547269

>>13546697

Shakespeare
Michelangelo
Mozart

>> No.13547278

>>13546697
Plato
Bach
Van Gogh

>> No.13547288

Shakespeare
Monet
The Beatles

>> No.13547301

Bacon
Bacon
Bacon

>> No.13547305

>>13547288
>The Beatles
Cringe

>> No.13547307

>>13547301
Favorite food?
Favorite actor?

>> No.13547316
File: 11 KB, 300x300, the bible.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13547316

>>13546697
the Logos

>> No.13547336

>>13547305
It’s literally impossible not to have at least one song you like from them

>> No.13547416

Shakespeare but I'm biased because I don't know Greek or Italian.
If the second is based on all creative output, Michelangelo's sculpture > all
If it's painting only then Rembrandt.
Last line depends on my mood. Probably Bach or Beethoven though.

>> No.13547425

>>13547336
I love the Beatles, especially their early pop nonsense, but comparing them to Bach or Mozart is ridiculous.

>> No.13547431

>>13546697
You can't compare writers of different genres. Since I mainly read English I'll say Shakespeare. If I mainly read Italian I'd say Dante. Nobody speaks Greek anymore though.
Michelangeo
Bach

>> No.13547436

>>13547431
different languages* not genres

>> No.13547498

>>13546697
Dante
Bouguereau
Wagner

>> No.13547594

>>13546727
BASED and REDPILLED

>> No.13547603

>>13547425
>NOOOOO YOU MUST RESPECT LE HIGH ARTS

>> No.13547624

>>13547603
Thanks philistine, very cool

>> No.13547709
File: 55 KB, 709x1024, patrician.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13547709

>>13546697
>>Bach, Mozart, or Beethoven?
Brahmas.

>> No.13547739

>>13546727
Archilochus is great but he's no match for Sappho and Alcaeus. And he's definitely no match for Catullus and Horace.

>> No.13547759

>>13546697
>Dante
>Rubens
>Bach

>> No.13547788

>Cervantes
>Velázquez
>Melendi

>> No.13547847

I don't like Homer.

>> No.13547889

>>13546697
>muh classics: the thread

>> No.13547916

>>13547288
>monet
>Beatles
t. shallow entertainment anon

Rembrandt is the greatest artists (painting/etching/drawing) to ever walk on this planet. Michelangelo's sculptures are obviously unmatched. Raffael is pure kitsch and utter shit

>> No.13547932

Dante
Rembrandt
Bach

>> No.13547937
File: 240 KB, 602x386, swg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13547937

>>13546697
Dante
Rembrandt
Bach

>> No.13547941

>>13547916
>shallow entertainment anon
Oh really? My original choices were actually

Stan Lee
Andy Warhol
The Ramones

>> No.13547944

>>13546697
what's with this old fat jew and his face

>> No.13547949

>>13546697
>>Homer, Dante, or Shakespeare?
Joyce
>Bach, Mozart, or Beethoven?
Louis Armstrong

>> No.13547953

>>13547941
Warhol has more substance than all impresionists put together

>> No.13547956

>>13547941
NYC BBY

>> No.13547957

>>13547624
>NOOOO WHAT DO YOU MEAN CLASSICAL MUZAK IS JUST A REPETITIVE SUCCESSION OF MORE OR LESS IRRITATING SOUNDS WITH LITTLE VARIANCE BETWEEN CREATED TO BE PLAYED IN THE BACKGROUND OF 18TH CENTURY ARISTOCRATIC DINNER PARTIES NOOOOOO.

>> No.13547959
File: 43 KB, 304x360, hand signs 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13547959

>>13547288
>The Beatles
They were satanists.

>> No.13547966
File: 83 KB, 834x467, paul_faul.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13547966

>>13547959

>> No.13548063

>Beatles, Dylan, Stones
>Spenser, Shakespeare, Milton
>Hammett, Chandler, Cain
>Ford, Hitchcock, Welles
>Mizoguchi, Kurosawa, Ozu
>Bruce, Carlin, Pryor

Any other big threes?

>> No.13548078
File: 39 KB, 596x400, 1_tWt1ZDt_7pCWazh_lpvSag.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13548078

>>13546697
shakespeare or homer
rembrandt, no competition there
mozart

>> No.13548079

>>13548063
Tarkovsky, Bresson, Bergman

>> No.13548092

>>13548063
Sneed, Feed and Seed

>> No.13548100

>>13548063
>Disney
>Kubrick
>Lynch

>> No.13548105 [DELETED] 

>>13548079
welles, ford, renoir you mean

>> No.13548114

>>13548105
No those three in anon's post are the cream of the crop of Europseud cinema.

>> No.13548134

>>13547957
Tbh that's a trillion times better than an even more repetitive succession of irritating sounds played in the background of Google ads.

You just broke down why classical music is the least shit genre of all time.

>> No.13548155
File: 286 KB, 800x552, concert-hall.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13548155

>>13547957
>TO BE PLAYED IN THE BACKGROUND OF 18TH CENTURY ARISTOCRATIC DINNER PARTIES
where do you get this? films?

>> No.13548180

>>13548114
Other comment already got deleted because plebs are not tolerated here

>> No.13548212

>Griffith, Eisenstein, Flaherty

>> No.13548226

>>13547957

Why don't you go listen to the St. Anne Prelude and Fugue, with its three voices representative of the aspects of the Trinity, and kill yourself you absolute pseud. The level of complexity and philosophic depth underlying the works of some of these artists puts other composers, and you, to shame.

>> No.13548230

>>13548063

Winkin, Blinkin, and Nod

>> No.13548270

>>13548063
Satoshi Kon, Hayao Miyazaki, Isao Takahata

>> No.13548283

>>13548270
Kon, obviously

>> No.13548286

>>13548212
Griffith, Eisenstein and Murnau more like

>> No.13548296

>Homer, Dante, or Shakespeare?

Like for like, shouldn't that be Milton? Shakespeare didn't write an epic poem.

It's also interesting that modern French never got an epic poem, the closest French has to an epic poem being the mediaeval "Chanson de Roland".

>> No.13548298

>>13548100
Stupid list, I'm sorry to say anon.

>> No.13548312

Merriam webster
Bob Ross
Esteban

>> No.13548315

Dante, Goya, Chopin

>> No.13548322

>>13548296
Those three are the ones generally considered by consensus to be the greatest writers of all time and certainly have the most direct influence.

>> No.13548327
File: 138 KB, 1080x1348, 56472566_2333255173578904_2875740012188233362_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13548327

>>13548226
>complexity = aesthetics

Pure pseud detected

>> No.13548332

>>13546734
BASEDDD

>> No.13548458

>>13548286
>murnau
SWING BABY SWING
Flaherty had that monkey killed for a reason

>> No.13548464

>>13546697
Chaucer
Bosch
Salieri

>> No.13548488

>>13548464
>Salieri

wtf no one genuinely likes salieri for his music

>> No.13548621

>>13548458
I genuinely don't understand this help me

>> No.13548693

>>13546697
Shakespeare
Michelangelo
Mozart

>> No.13548725

Homer
Michelangelo
Chopin

>> No.13549061
File: 3.46 MB, 4984x2957, 1555304095324.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13549061

Schlegel
Friedrich
Schumann

>> No.13549066

>no Goethe

>> No.13549077

>>13547739
His use of the definite article was a turning point not only for poetry but for the future developments of abstract ideas in Greek philosophy. That's why I chose him over Alcaeus. I'm not that into Sappho, tbqh

>> No.13549197

>>13549066
he's on the same tier with Chaucer, Cervantes, Milton, and Dostoevsky; i.e. the one immediately below but still higher up than all the rest

>> No.13549210
File: 319 KB, 737x1024, serveimage-4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13549210

>>13549197
There has not been a single individual born, apart from Jesus Christ, that was greater than Goethe.

>> No.13549218

>>13546697
Homer
Michelangelo
Beethoven

>>13548725
I like Chopin but you can listen to a number of other classicists and realize that a lot of what he does is just rambling flourishes. I might put Rachmaninoff over Beethoven personally but Beethoven is the true great.

And Dante is flat-out not as good as Homer or Shakespeare.

>> No.13549270

>>13546697
Dickens
Monet
Schoenberg

>> No.13549346

>>13549218
I'm a total pleb but Chopin can touch me deeply like no one else, it's just much closer to my heart whether or not it's the most sophisticated. I'm Polish so I'm biased

>> No.13549941

>>13546697
Shakespeare, Rembrandt, Beethoven

>> No.13549957
File: 68 KB, 960x540, p01bqx0q.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13549957

>>13546697
Dante, Rembrandt and Beethoven should never even be in the running.

Its Mozart, Velasquez, Shakespeare.

>> No.13550260

Rabelais, Brueghel, Bartok

yes I took the carnivalpill

>> No.13550289

>>13549197
who is supposed to be above cervantes?

>> No.13550737

>>13550289
Homer, Dante, and Shakespeare

>> No.13550773

>>13550737
>Shakespeare and Homer on the same tier
Anglos...

>> No.13550841

>>13548327

A false equivalency greentext argument tells me all I need to know. Namely, that you're beyond hope. Time to crank Shostakovich and sadly shake my head for you.

>> No.13550916

>>13550773
"only anglos think Shakespeare is great" is a meme
the entire Romantic movement in Continental Europe was influenced by then recent translations of Shakespeare

>> No.13550987

>>13550916
Nobody is saying that Shakespeare isn't great. Cervantes was great. Montaigne was great. Goethe was great. Virgil was great. Does that mean that they share Homer greatness? I doubt it.
Cervantes wrote the first modern novel. Montaigne created the modern essay. So what? None of them compares with Homer.

>> No.13551017

>>13550987
Homer wrote some of the oldest epic so what? See everyone can just baselessly assert what thry want. The Homeric poems are an absolute bore compared to Don Quijote.

>> No.13551038

>>13551017
I can't comprehend people getting bored with Homer. You can take almost any word and write a thesis on it. I love Don Quijote, don't get me wrong, but it's not a contender imo.

>> No.13551056

>>13551038
In what manner are Shakespeare's tragedies and the Divine Comedy not "contenders"? They're equally dense with meaning and beautifully written.

>> No.13551071

>>13551017
>The Homeric poems are an absolute bore compared to Don Quijote.
Preferring comedy to tragedy is the surest sign of a redditor. Unironically calling Homer boring is concrete proof of brainletism. Altogether I’d prefer if you were dead.

>> No.13551095

>>13547788
Good opinion

>> No.13551104

>>13551056
I could see Dante contending. Is not the same for Shakespeare, though. Conceptually, his tragedies do not contend. He's great at showing the performative aspect of the human psyche and that probably makes him the best playwright in History, next to Aeschylus and Euripides. But I can't see that his plays have the symbolic depths that the Illiad or the Commedia have. Of course it's just an opinion. The discussion is about opiniones. There's no objective way to pick among the greats. If you read in English exclusively, you'll probably pick Shakespeare. If you read in Spanish exclusively, you'll probably pick Quevedo or Cervantes. And so on.

>> No.13551111

>>13546697
Shakespeare
Vermeer
Bach

>> No.13551112

>>13547788
>>13550289
>>13550773
>>13551017
pls stop
>>13551095
but i’m sure you appreciate your own very praise very much

>> No.13551128

>>13551112
Sorry dad. I'll shut up.

>> No.13551431
File: 16 KB, 625x626, 1560066023533.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13551431

>>13547953

>> No.13551679

>>13550987
The reach of Shakespeare is enormous. Perhaps not as large as Homer but the only writer who comes even close to him in terms of sheer influence is Shakespeare. Modern Literature and storytelling are genuinely unthinkable without him which you can't say for any other writer apart from Homer and Dante

>> No.13551759

>>13551679
Honestly, I think that it's problematic to compare influences. If someone influenced Shakespeare (for example, some ancient tragediograph or Cervantes himself), does that mean that they share some of Shakespeare's merit? I would say no, and I believe you would agree, but it's debatable.
Imo, comparing authors ranking-wise is dumb. Shakespeare has been a key component and influence in all modern literature, as Cervantes has been for novels, Montaigne for essays, Descartes for philosophy, etc. Here, in this site, there's always a debate about what language is better and which country has the best literature; that kind of discussion ignores that 'influences' do not depend solely on language, nationality or time period. Of course that the availability of some text may very well be crucial for some book to be influential (Shakespeare is far more known than Calderón de la Barca or Racine), but it does not determine literary value.
Nevermind, I don't know what I'm even saying anymore. What I meant is that I'm not hating Shakespeare nor anglos, he may very well be the goat, but to argue without realising the contingency of holding such opinion is dumb.
Sorry for the bad English, it's late and I'm tired.

>> No.13552055

>>13551679
thats because homer isnt a person

>> No.13552179

>>13546697
cringe

>> No.13552502

>>13552055
yeah you wish, the only reason brainlets propagate this bullshit is literally only cope, it’s the not so subtly anti-white redditor pathology of trying to diminish the feats of Greats in western culture combined with philistine disdain for the high arts. it’s the same sort of people who say that talent doesn’t exist or that art is totally subjective. just subversive mediocrities trying to level the playing field.

>> No.13552687

>>13548298
No stupider than yours

>> No.13553308
File: 305 KB, 347x475, 1422988507524.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13553308

>>13549061
Schumann wasn't even the best Dresden composer

>> No.13553312

>>13552502
I was under the impression Homer was kind of codifying an already existing oral tradition of poetic epics. An anon a while ago linked a book about this which I read, it was about the change between illiteracy and literacy in cultures and the profound effect it has on the human mind and thought. Can't remember the title but it was intriguing, and it said that the writing in Homer is clearly indicative of an oral tradition.

>> No.13553346
File: 108 KB, 854x1024, serveimage-5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13553346

>>13553308
woops, wrong picture

>> No.13553462

>>13552687
Didn't make a list anon. Stupid retort.

>> No.13553513

>>13551759
>If someone influenced Shakespeare (for example, some ancient tragediograph or Cervantes himself), does that mean that they share some of Shakespeare's merit? I would say no, and I believe you would agree, but it's debatable.
It's not debatable. The only major writer to be influenced by Thomas Kyd was William Shakespeare. The list of major writers to be influenced by Shakespeare is too vast for me to list here. Therefore Shakespeare is more influential. Influence can quite clearly be measurable from literary analysis to just listening to writers when they clearly say "I read x and it affected me deeply and influenced me when I wrote y." Shakespeare's influence is clearly quite present across a wide range of fields: theatre, poetry, novels, cinema, music, art, philosophy and a whole language itself which is more to be said than the vast majority of his peers across history. Even now he still lives with us through the performance and re-reading of his plays not just in the Anglosphere but across the world. The same cannot be said to nearly that extent for Homer and Dante or Cervantes or nearly anyone else. Speaking about them is an act of necromancy in comparison.

Not to get all Harold Bloom but I think that the idea of literary value becomes utterly meaningless and arbitrary unless you factor in the notion of literary influence first.

>> No.13553536

>>13553513
I don't know where you live, but Cervantes is far more influential in all the countries I have lived (of course, I have only lived in Spanish speaking countries).
I'm sure you can easily and quantifiably prove that Shakespeare is more influential than Marlowe, Bocaccio or Quevedo, but to say that '[t]he dame cannot be said to nearly that extent for Homer and Dante ir Cervantes' seems like a bold and unsubstantiated claim.
I repeat, I'm not saying Shakespeare is not influential or good, but to claim he's more important than Homer seems like a anglocentric take.

>> No.13553568

>>13553513
And Homer's and Dante's influence on language is as big (maybe even bigger) than Shakespeare. The difference is that Greek already died as a language and nobody gives a fuck about italian people now. That doesn't mean that they shaped their languages and, therefore, the course of History. For example, check Snell's analysis on the importance of the use of the definite article in archaic poetry for the development of abstract concept (via the conversion of adjectives: αγατός, or good, into ο Αγαθός, the Good).

>> No.13553573

>>13553568
>>13553536
Sorry for the mistakes, as I said I'm a filthy spic.

>> No.13553588

>>13553536
I have lived in multiple countries of varying different languages (English, Spanish, German, Farsi and Mandarin)
and Shakespeare has been the one writer who has consistently and most strongly jumped these language barriers. You won't find any other long dead writer with the exception of Homer (and in his case only in very particular circles) who work is doing that.

>> No.13554166

>>13546697
Homer, Michelangelo, Bach.
You're objectively wrong If You answer differently

>> No.13554302

Homer
Michelangelo
Mozart

>> No.13554409

>>13553312
There’s no convincing evidence or even argument that Homer isn’t the author of the Iliad and the Odyssey, so this sort of specious speculation in that regard is an unnecessary attack, usually by subversive sorts or simply “academics” simultaneously looking to make a buck and finger their poofter over the sound of their own voice.
It’s an ouvre of two epic poems. It’s not like it’s mindbogglingly impossible. If Shakespeare were from Homer’s time people would be even more easily persuaded that he was multiple people.
Again, most often the reason for this angle, maybe sometimes subconciously, but I think more often insidiously, is the modern pathology with leveling the playing field.

>> No.13555437

Novalis
Raphael
Schubert

>> No.13556367

>>13555437
Stupid contrarian NONSENSE

>> No.13556418

>>13547288
The Beatles weren't even the best rock/popist. They were far more an entertainment and assimilation phenomenon than they were serious artists.

>> No.13556424

>>13546697
Dante is the GOAT.
t. Borges

>> No.13556460

>Shakespeare
>Michelangelo
>Bach

>> No.13556525

>>13546697
Willy Shakes
Rembrandt
Beethoven

>> No.13558154

>>13554409
Homer wrote more epics than the two that remained until today. All the passing references to the Trojan horse, Orestes, Oedipus etc. were actually codified in his lost works.

>> No.13558182
File: 1.70 MB, 327x251, fookuff.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13558182

>>13556418
Fuck off. You can't prove anything you're saying Die.

>> No.13558205

>Goethe
>da Vinci
>Rachmaninoff

I'd reasonable interchange any of the above with any of the below:
>Homer
>Michelangelo
>Chopin

>> No.13558233

>>13553346
>Weber
>even comparable to Wagner
Yeah, no.

>> No.13558282

>>13558205
You're based. I'd suck your dick.

>> No.13558355

>>13558282
go on then

>> No.13558368

>>13558355
Just blew myself like 13 minutes ago. Where were you?

>> No.13558383

>>13558368
What's that got to do with you sucking my dick. Fucking retard.

>> No.13558487

>>13558383
Man schizophrenia is a real trip