[ 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: 67 KB, 512x628, F6544654-19A4-47B1-9CBF-6E3931C7A30E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13640226 No.13640226 [Reply] [Original]

Do excuses such as "It was a product of the time" properly explain away the racism present in some classic and otherwise very good authors?

>> No.13640232

No, but "it substantially improved his writing and constituted the majority of his (non-abstract) creative process" is a good explanation.

>> No.13640238

>>13640226
>explain away
Why bother? He was a racist. He was a good writer. Both can be true, it's not a paradox.

>> No.13640241

>>13640226
Yeah, sure, the dude that literally called himself Abdul Alhazred all his youth was racist. Stop this meme already.

>> No.13640243

>>13640226
Superior intelligence explains the other half

>> No.13640246

Everyone hated black people and jews before 1950, get a fucking grip

>> No.13640249

>>13640238
There’s no such thing as muh racism retard, there is only the ability to discern the difference between races despite brainwashing, and the brainwashed. You are the latter case. Mayhap to your surprise, H P Lovecraft was not.

>> No.13640253

>>13640226
"It was a product of the time" only kicks the can down the road. It allows one to think that literature is only of its time, that a whole other time is "racist," and curiously also closes down discussion that today's "anti-racism" is merely a product of its time.

>> No.13640263
File: 81 KB, 818x434, DUQ8j2sX4AEWiUk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13640263

>> No.13640273

>>13640253
You probably wear clothing that is the product of sweat-shop labor. Why do you approve of slavery? You're on the wrong side of history.

>> No.13640292

>>13640226
Why is reading racist fiction bad?

>> No.13640298

>>13640226
Oftentimes yeah it can but even for his time Lovecraft was considered racist so make of that whatever you want. Dude can be racist and still a good author.

>> No.13640299

It's not an excuse, anon, its people asking you to stop spewing such obvious, lazy and overdone criticism and actually contribute some interesting and original commentary.

>> No.13640300

>>13640226
A little, but it doesn't matter. It only really matters if he was out there actually acting on his racism or campaigning for it.

>> No.13640316

>>13640300
Yeah God forbid, just think what America would look like if it were whiter because our forefathers made sure of it. Can you imagine safe inner cities? Disgusting.

>> No.13640469
File: 237 KB, 500x370, spongebob wat.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13640469

>>13640226
obviously
any other answer is completely wrong because it makes little sense to use a modern day moral lens on a previous era when talking about people

>hmm yes i'm a great person and my morals are completely in line with morals 200 years from now even though i don't know what they will be

>> No.13640479

>>13640226
Define “otherwise”

>> No.13640483

YOU are the product of your time. He had the natural position.

>> No.13640531

>>13640483
this

>> No.13640539

literally just dont be a piece of sht and youll be fine

>> No.13640542

>>13640483
Cope

>> No.13641530

>>13640226
no, even at the time people knew it was wrong but you didn't have to care, even in modern times they'd still be racist they'd most likely just hide it

>> No.13641533

>>13640469
>how could slave owners have possibly known whipping and enslaving another human was an immoral thing

>> No.13641547

>>13641533
morality isn't real

>> No.13641556

>>13641547
why?

>> No.13641573

>>13641533
Who did Lovecraft whip and enslave? Or did he just point out the truth about niggers?

>> No.13641581

>>13641573
smoothbrain take, you must have italian or irish genes.

>> No.13641590

>>13641533
The bible was the supreme moral authority of the time, and it makes the case for slavery. So some people believed it was morally acceptable.

>> No.13641595

>>13641533
>how could people have possible known that disregarding every right of non-human living beings and then eating them without remorse was an immoral thing?
I love eating steak. Lobsters taste great even though they get boiled alive.
People like me will be vilified in 200 years.
None of this shit matters

>> No.13641598

>>13641595
>rights
>non-human living being
wew lads

>> No.13641601

>>13641598
exactly, retard
>rights
>niggers
same shit, different century

>> No.13641617

>>13640249
Unironically 200IQ

>> No.13641619
File: 7 KB, 446x305, This2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13641619

>>13640263

>> No.13641636

>>13641601
I doubt we will find out that animals are humans too in a few centuries

>> No.13641653

>>13641636
No shit. By definition they are not human.
But I've no doubt that the "animal rights" issue will be one which will eventually vilify present-day individuals until people are shocked by our actions, or lack of action.
That, and who knows what other issues.
The point is that we are taking action in the present that will be thought of as reprehensible in the future.
To find any literature written today as problematic because those actions are included within them is just as inane what OP is talking about.
Just put it in the context of its time and move the fuck on.

>> No.13641668

>>13640226
It's not an excuse, it's an explanation. It does not explain away anything, and it should not explain away anything because the time is a part of the work and should thus be taken into consideration when reading it.

>> No.13641689

>>13641598
>animal rights don't exist
what on earth are you talking about my friend

>> No.13641826

>>13640246
Most people still hate them. Nowadays they're just being punished and jailed for expressing it.

>>13640226
Yes, he was a racist, but racism isn't bad. This is a natural state of man to note the differences between different species. There have been tons of experiments where kids were given dolls of different colours (black and white) and white kids always went for white dolls and never for black ones. There are even videos of that. Like the one with those two ginger girls that received black dolls as a present and were visibly disappointed.
I'm an ESL and was brought up in a 90%+ white country with other ~10% being either asians or some muslim minority, which I barely ever encountered.
The first time I ever encountered a black man in person was a year ago. Yes, they are that rare here. And when I saw him it literally felt like it was an alien creature, that it wasn't the same human race as myself. They resemble a human but they are just completely different from anything I've ever seen. I've never experienced anything like that with Asians though.
I know I sound like a massive racist, but I don't care because I don't see this as an issue. I'm sure blacks perceive white people the same way.
Racism is natural.

>> No.13641836

>>13640226
What does being racist have to do with writing well.

>> No.13641859

>>13640226
To the same extent that they explain away the lack of racism of contemporary authors.

>> No.13641877

>>13641826
Sounds like you’re lucky black people don’t have a culture where you live. But anyway fuck what’s natural, racism is SENSIBLE. Diversity brings inequality via evolution, races don’t have the same pedigree, you wouldn’t hire someone with no qualifications if the job expected a standard of qualifications. And that doesn’t mean we need nationalism. Races can live amongst each other if we acknowledge the reality of the burden they bring, this should be so fucking basic, you don’t just walk into someone’s home with expectations, you do so with grace. I’m not sure what to think about people who are pro diversity and immigration, things with literally no benefits for anyone but rich people and the immigrants themselves at the cost of the natives and the country they come from. How is supporting the 1% a bigger priority to the left than fixing the third world? What the fuck is this clown world.

>> No.13641932

>>13640226
You don't need to explain away anything. Most people are racist, some are just less honest about it than others. Back in the 1920s, it wasn't unusual or frowned upon at all, so people were more honest about what they believed.

Racism does not diminish the quality of a work. Why would it? Sexism doesn't diminish the quality of a work either. It is only when you get into the preposterous position of stating that literate has some sort of duty to push globo-homo egalitarianism regardless of when it was written that this problem even arises. I mean imagine if we refused to read the Illiad because it was sexist as fuck. That would be cringe in the extreme. In fact it's so cringe, I'm sure there are people demanding that the Greek canon be completely removed from syllabuses at this very moment because half of it is a bunch of old white dudes reminding us that women are inferior to men.

Lovecraft was a racist. He was also HP fucking Lovecraft. Gene Roddenberry was a communist, which is like ten times worse than being a racist, but everyone still likes Star Trek.

>> No.13641943

>>13640241
You can like some foreign races and be racist against others you know. Just look at how /pol/ jacks off to Japan while hating pretty much all nonwhites.

>> No.13641944

>>13640263
Based

>> No.13641968

>>13640542
That's sort of the opposite of a cope, it's a factual statement. It took decades of deliberate brainwashing by the entire media apparatus and the state to force white people to actually believe that blacks are just like white people.

Meanwhile you can just crack open an IQ study of Africa and see that the average IQ in Somalia is, what, high 60s? That's two full standard deviations below the average. That's actual data. The Flynn Effect, proper nutrition, specialized cognitive training based education all combined have less than one SD of effect on IQ.

Pretty much the only explanation is a genetic predilection towards low IQ. You had to be taught to ignore all of this and assume incorrectly that human beings are some sort of tabula rasa who can be interchangeably transplanted into society and magically made into first world people just by raising them like first world people.

It's like Lysenkoism for humans.

>> No.13641996

>>13640226
Racism is a natural human expression.

>> No.13642019 [DELETED] 

>>13640226
Racism is good and just.

>> No.13642030

>>13640238
Exactly, some of the best writers in the world were Jewish

>> No.13642066

>>13641533
>how could horse jockies have possibly known whipping and enslaving another animal was an immoral thing

>> No.13642408

>>13640226
What do you mean "explain away"? What's wrong with racism?

>> No.13642430

>>13640226
racism was invented in 20th century.

>> No.13642440

>>13640226
It was the product of a better time.

>> No.13642482

>>13642030
kek

>> No.13642487

>>13641943
>he's never been on pol

>> No.13642512

>>13641932
Define "racism" and "sexism".

>> No.13644048

>>13642487
hello r*ddit

>> No.13644171

>>13642512
I'd say a workable definition would be treating people differently based on the immutable characteristics of their race or sex.

The usual response to this is that "reverse racism isn't real hurr durr," which is, of course, an idiotic and cringe statement.

>> No.13645286

>>13644171
Holding the door for a woman, but not for a man is sexism?

>> No.13645332

>>13640226
The racism thing is for children, it's for edgy teens who don't know any history. Nobody reads HPL (or REH, or ERB for that matter) for the racism. No work of literature would survive if it had to satisfy every pseudointellectual fashion that would come decades or centuries later. And when we're gone and the Han stride the earth like gods, or like Dr Moreau surveying his beast-men, do you think they'll agonize over the name of a housecat?

>> No.13645357

>>13640226
It doesn't need to be "explained away" to begin with, so I reject your hypothesis.

>> No.13645371

>>13640226
>explain away
And why do we need to explain it? Are you trying to imply racism isnt rational?

>> No.13645381

>>13645286
>not holding the door for your bros
In a sense it kind of is i guess if society conditions you to believe that women are the only ones that you're supposed to open doors to
Not in the sense that it's a horrible thing to open doors for anyone, but why do you only do it for women? Because you think they can't do it themselves or because men are supposed to do it themselves?
prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination is what it is when you're talking about a dictionary type of definition but there's definitely a difference between passive, cultural gender norms like you describe here and active hatred of women.

>> No.13645412

>>13645381
So more generally, being politer to women than one is to men is sexism? Would it be better (as in, less sexist) to be as rude to women as one is to men? Is sexism evil?

>> No.13645430

>>13645412
Well the best option would be to be equally as nice to both wouldn't it?
Evil is a harsh word for it but it sure isn't a good thing. An egalitarian society is one where women and men are treated as equal, that is to say, people hold the doors for both, or none.

>> No.13645441

>>13645430
When you say "treated as equal", do you mean that they would be treated the same because they are the same (i.e. there is no difference between men and women in any way) or would they be treated the same because everyone collectively agrees to pretend that there are no differences between men and women?

>> No.13645460

>racism = bad
go back to redit, faggot. don't just assume we all agree with your crazy, faggot, decades old ideology.

>> No.13645476

>>13645441
Nobody is going to pretend that there are *no* differences between men and women. Women and men have biological differences for sure, but what exactly do you say when you make this vague notion of treating people differently is needed?
Aside from physical work where a lot of the times a woman might just not have the strength needed to say, push a heavy object, in modern society they can fulfill pretty much every role a man can. So why treat them differently?
Sexism is not just holding doors open for people and you know that.

>> No.13645534 [DELETED] 

>>13640226
>implying hating niggers is bad

>> No.13645571

>>13645460
Hating people for something as unimportant as their skin color is definitely not virtuous

>> No.13645589
File: 125 KB, 678x713, IQ_African_nations.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13645589

>>13645571
>skin color

>> No.13645593

>>13645460
racism is good, especially against retards with huge egos like niggers

>> No.13645599

>>13645571
stupid fucking nigger
you are a counterfeit
a fake
you are an imposter trying to be white
fuck off before we kill you all

>> No.13645623

>>13641533
Punishing someone is not wrong.

>> No.13645630

>>13645571
>Hating people
>skin color
for fuck sake, at least trying not be an utter faggot.

>> No.13645706

Why is it alright to make fun of people based on their height, weight, eyesight, jawline, hairline, penile length, etc. but not for their skin color?

>> No.13645986

>>13645571
So all the violence and noise and rudeness and poor impulse control, that's not a reason to hate someone? You honestly think people have one of those shade cards from the hardware store?

>> No.13646029

Blacks, even back then were just as racist.

>> No.13646057

>>13640226
Another book burning campaign for a long dead author that does not follow a modern groups dictated and forced behavioral standards.

You come off not only as ignorant of the implications of your intolerant actions, But as some one who is trying to gain favor from these groups, ruining the chance some one could see you as an autonomous thinker for getting upset over something so insignificant in our day to day lives.

>> No.13646067

>>13640238
For people who think it isn't possible, think about Wagner as a composer. Another example, Carlo Gesualdo killed his wife and her lover but was the most original harmonist until probably the late 19th century. You can still make great art and still do/think/say bad things.

>> No.13646209

>>13645476
>in modern society they can fulfill pretty much every role a man can
Sure, they can, but should they? Can you prove your assertion? How would you?

>> No.13646303 [DELETED] 
File: 16 KB, 262x276, the nose knows.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13646303

>>13645706
It's totally inexplicable. There is no possible explanation. Don't think about it.

>> No.13646439

>>13641968
Serious question, how do those IQ surveys account for differences in upbringing?

I.e., Somaia is the third world country of third world countries, so it's obvious anyone raised in poverty there is going to have a lower IQ than if they were raised in a first world country.

>> No.13646449 [DELETED] 

>>13640226
fuck niggers

>> No.13646459

>>13646439
The twin studies and the studies of black and white children raised by the opposite race(adoptions) are the biggest evidence about that. There aren't a lot of studies about this because nobody really wants to think about it.

I do understand that, if the public were really aware of the differences it would probably be not very good for some races.

>> No.13646467

>>13645706
Guess.

>> No.13646778

>>13640226
>excuses
Why would you even need an 'excuse'. They did nothing wrong. Disliking what you don't dislike isn't a flaw or an error.
You may argue the thing is lovable by itself and thus they were wrong. That lay be true when speaking about God or even classical sculpture, but are you really going to use that line about negroes and whatever else Lovecraft disliked?

>> No.13646804

>>13642487
/pol/ is the least white board on 4chan, along with /int/ which is /pol/: larp as your flag edition.
That being said they do like Japan. In fact liking Japan is almost a prerequisite for being a white nationalist. The non amerimutts also like China.
It's almost as if their racism had little to do with xenophobia (as in the above strawman) but instead focus on the characteristics of the people they dislike.

>> No.13646831

>>13640249
that's a lot of words just to say you're a racist

>> No.13646895

>>13640226
this thread seems unnecessary and vapidly social, unwilling to introspect and therefore forced to extrospect circumspectly OP does post. thought would subsume racism in the minds of many but yet unstated; what of king's self-hatred? to wish to set the white alight is fright alright but tonight he posts HP to see if we respond abscond or never post at all. Why? Check yourself, OP.