/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13664265]

The democratisation of education has killed literature.

Mass literacy of the middle and lower classes has resulted in publishing houses favouring pulp fiction, self-help dross and celebrity biographies for capital.
The masses have no cultivated taste and therefore read primarily for mindless entertainment with its artistic equivalent being reality television or pop radio.
Schools teach the masses to look for moral or allegorical meanings rather than aesthetics and craftsmanship. The masses do not develop any sense of style and are so inept they actually believe this to be a waste of time to study.
Poetry is dead because the masses are incapable of reading it. A perfect example is the monumentous popularity of Rupi Kaur, a non-poet charlatan penning slivers of tripe covered in glitter.
Even niche literary magazines are so swept up in nostalgia for yesteryear they utterly neglect to report or include any exciting contemporary literature, and even when they do, it is always a comparative style to bygone writers.

[Anonymous No.13664293]

>>13664265
You're complaining about publishing houses, but in fact publishing houses themselves are a symptom of mass literacy and democratization (no surprise they are run by Jews, the same people behind modern democracy). All the best literature was produced by aristocratic patronage systems, priestly castes only accountable to the divine, wandering bards, etc.

The best way to revive literature would be a return to medieval feudalism.

[Anonymous No.13664417]

>>13664293
>blaming x-peoples for all your problems
About 70 million people already died to show that it doesn't work that way, but "muh western culture". Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.13664445]

>>13664293
>medieval feudalism.
based

[Anonymous No.13664611]

If something valuable is given to everyone then it loses its value

[Anonymous No.13664683]

>>13664611
says the incel

[Anonymous No.13664822]

>>13664265
>has killed literature.
art in general is dead

[Anonymous No.13664857]

>>13664683

[Anonymous No.13664878]

>>13664293
Absolutely this. Aristocracy and monarchy is ideal because it will always maintain a consistent elite, making it difficult for subversive creatures and plebeians to rise to power. Our world has always been given by the elite, we need an aristocratic elite to prevent the subversive and the plebeians from gaining power.

[Anonymous No.13664953]

>>13664878
Absolutist monarchy resurrection when?

[Anonymous No.13664959]

>>13664953
Soon, with the upcoming materialistic collapse of the West, a caesarist government will replace many of our societies as Spengler identified, this will naturally include more Aristocratic and monarchist tendencies.

[Anonymous No.13664985]

>>13664878
also to add on top a direct and authentic relation of power , not this bullshit ''friendly'' relation we have.

[Anonymous No.13665180]

>>13664878
cringe

[Anonymous No.13665930]

>>13664265
https://discord.gg/P4ENU37

[Anonymous No.13666386]

>>13664265

[Anonymous No.13666455]

>>13664265
I do not see how this would at all effect literature you deem worth consuming. If the masses consume literature, that just means the percentage of literature that is of merit is smaller, that doesn't imply that it would be reduced in absolute quantity. At worst, it would just be less visible. Unless, of course, you are implying that the absolute population of smart people is becoming smaller, which would be quite silly.

[Anonymous No.13666467]

t. lower middle class idiot who thinks they're something special because they've read mediocre books somebody else wrote

[Anonymous No.13666603]

>>13664265
>complaining about education while knowing so little about history
Masterstroke

[Anonymous No.13666611]

>>13664293
pretty much this

[Anonymous No.13667652]

>>13666455
t. stephen king

[Anonymous No.13667660]

>>13666603
post your knowledge of history that negates OP