/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14537541]

BASED Stephen King

https://archive[dot]ph/Zqfgt

[Anonymous No.14537551]

>The walking, human roastbeef immeadetly seethes

[Anonymous No.14537585]

>>14537541
Is there a single (1) reason every other functional human being shouldn't just turn his back to this nonsense and live a happy perfectly satisfying life far from their delusions of equality and diversity.


Oh right... They won't let you live unless you do

[Anonymous No.14537636]

>>14537551
>as a professional critic, as long as there are whites and non-lgbtq individuals, it's a success. art isn't about quality or art.

[Anonymous No.14537671]

>>14537636
> there are whites and non-lgbtq individuals
Those things are a predictor of quality.

[Anonymous No.14537689]

>>14537541
Are you going to give us context or not, this tweet alone could be interpreted a million different ways. Unless we aren't really discussing the tweet and the thread is just circlejerk, in which case carry on

[Anonymous No.14537712]

>>14537689
Based clueless anon

[Anonymous No.14537735]

>>14537541
I loathe Marxism and Modernism and Post-Modernism, but it seems strange to me that the quality of any art could be considered without respect to its content and meaning. It is certainly impossible to say, regardless of intended or received or actual meaning, that race is not part of the content.

We are all very aware that skin color exists and is a genetic trait. We are all very aware that people have in the past organized themselves around both skin color, or other concepts which invariably lead to uniformity of skin color. We are also all very aware that whether or not skin color is acknowledged as a primary motivation for social organization today by any group, people in the United States are still largely organized in such a way as to at least appear based on skin color.

Frankly, Stephen King is not BASED, nor based, nor woke, nor WOKE, nor any positive description used sincerely, ironically, or post-ironically. The attitude Stephen King expresses is very much the root of our inability to have coherent and open conversations today. He speaks of quality. What is the quality of something if not the goodness of the thing? How can this be answered before one first answers what is good?

If there can be any truth to the idea of BOOMERS, as an ideology, it is in this amorphous non-ideology of moral indifference which achieves peace by denial of any moral imperative. What is art to Stephen King? What is quality? Would he say the skin color of the actors of a film have no bearing on its quality? I'm sure he considers Do the Right Thing a good movie, but could anyone consider it a good movie if all the actors in it were Italian? How is the character of Dick Hallorann changed if he is written as a white man? Why did Stephen King even bother to make him black?

It is a simple matter of fact that any visual artist must decide the color of their characters. It is perfectly fine that Stephen King would submit his nominations based on his determinations of quality. But how could he make any determination of quality without implicitly having some attitude about race in art?

[Anonymous No.14537736]

I mean I agree but there are loads of good international/non-Hollywood films that get ignored simply because they're not part of the Hollywood clique. But blaming the lack of native Africans or whichever group of people uncommon in the US on racism is fucking stupid, especially considering wanting to be involved with Hollywood is reprehensible. Good art does exist outside of one's own sheltered bubble but it's the wrong approach to guilt people into consuming art made by other cultures and races, or God forbid mandate it.

[Anonymous No.14537763]

>>14537712
Aren't the rest of the posters prove me right, everyone interprets the tweet differently because context wasn't provided

[Anonymous No.14537780]

>>14537735
>race is just skin colour

[Anonymous No.14537815]

>>14537541
From an European perspective, American society is becoming way too polarized and divided. And this is a fine example. Just because Stephen King doesn't condone racism agaist Whites (bc that's what these diversity quotas are, wherever they are applied), now he is gonna be put thought hell by half the Liberal/Left voices in America. And he is gonna be automatically assigned to the "boomer Republican, aka mainstream conservative" side.

Americans should get working on a commocore of values that everybody can share, like in the old, fancy days. But it doesn't look like happening soon.

[Anonymous No.14537830]

>>14537689
He's saying that it doesn't matter what colour someone is.

[Anonymous No.14537843]

>>14537541
If you don't care about diversity why is the mc in the dark tower movie black? Huh?! Check mate my doods. Got the pedo good.

[Anonymous No.14537890]

>>14537541
he can barely write white men as it is, are you clowns seriously going to fucking defend this hack now?

[Anonymous No.14537935]

aaaaaand he cucked out lmao

[Anonymous No.14537980]

>>14537830
That can still be interpreted a million different ways

[Anonymous No.14538055]

>>14537935
First he says that you shouldn't award someone an Oscar because he or she is a minority, and then he says that we should make sure that minorities have a fair shot and aren't discriminated against. How is this contradictory? Are you guys actually read what he writes or all you can see is "first he said diversity bad then diversity good".

[Anonymous No.14538071]

>>14537689
kek good one

[Anonymous No.14538086]

>>14537843
Wasn't that movie shit?

[Anonymous No.14538096]

>>14537541
i just finished IT yesterday, and i cant get the child orgy scene out of my mind...

[Anonymous No.14538114]

>>14538071
Thanks anon

[Anonymous No.14538120]

>>14538096
Is this a good or a bad thing

[Anonymous No.14538244]

>>14538055
it's obvious from the context and it's why people are shitting on him over it: this new tweet reads like backpedaling because his earlier tweets seem to imply that the lack of opportunity of certain groups should not be taken into account when evaluating art/giving awards. yet now he says "hold up, it don't be fair" in the most vague, noncommittal terms possible of course.

[Anonymous No.14538336]

>>14538244
>his earlier tweets seem to imply that the lack of opportunity of certain groups should not be taken into account when evaluating art/giving awards.
Just because he doesn't think you should get an Oscar because of your lack of equal opportunity doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make sure everyone gets a fair shot. There is literally no contradiction.

[Anonymous No.14538380]

>>14538336
he went from:
>...I would never consider diversity in matters of art. Only quality. It seems to me that to do otherwise would be wrong.

to

>The most important thing we can do as artists and creative people is make sure everyone has the same fair shot, regardless of sex, color, or orientation. Right now such people are badly under-represented, and not only in the arts.
>You can't win awards if you're shut out of the game.

or tl;dr
>i wouldn't consider diversity in matters of art
to
>dude we gotta do something, PoC don't have a chance

"matters of art" includes things like... inclusion, art is not separate from its creators. so he just comes off as a feckless boomer at best or a dishonest cowtower at worst. he seems at first to say "stop bitching about darkies not getting awards, only art matters *sips*" to these boring neolib lip service tweets about how identity is the most important thing moments later

[Anonymous No.14538488]

>>14538380
"We shouldn't give Oscars to people just because they are disadvantaged, that said we should make sure everyone gets a fair shot". This is literally all he said.

[Anonymous No.14538521]

>>14538380
Tweet 1
>Your work should matter more than your race (rhetorical sauce #1)

Tweet 2
>Your work should matter more than your race (rhetorical sauce #2)

[Anonymous No.14538589]

>>14537735
This is an ontological arguement though. Should the context of a work of art matter or not? I don't think the answer is as obviois as you make it seem.
An an extension, if I create a molecularly perfect recreation of a work of art, one whose original was rich with contextual value, doea my recreation carry that same value? Does it carry any more value than a recreation of some work of art which was not rich with contextual value?

[Anonymous No.14538608]

>>14538380
Your misinterpretation, veey common among idiots, is the actual problem.

[Anonymous No.14538690]

>>14537935
Why would Jewish people shut out minorities?

[Anonymous No.14539086]

The true based opinion is that twitter and awards shows should simply end, period.

With twitter, nuanced conversation of complex topics cannot take place in 140 characters per post and only invites "gotcha" moments like this one.

Instead of awards shows, we should instead look at what reviews from critics actually say about movies, and look at things like individual critics' top ten lists and things like the Sight & Sound Poll, which are formed after significant time has passed.

A good chunk of film critics will praise films from Spike Lee, Ousmane Sembene, Akira Kurosawa, Yasujiro Ozu, Abbas Kiarostami, etc., etc. Many critics will have had The Farewell and Dolemite is My Name on their top 10 of 2019 lists. Whether or not Do the Right Thing is #76 and Eraserhead is #75 on a top 100 best movies of all time list is useless, what matters is what movies make the cut.

[Anonymous No.14539111]

>>14539086
I agree completely, thanks anon. Although, The Farewell was completely underwhelming and Sembene is a hack as is Spike Lee aside from Do the Right Thing. Abbas, Kira, and Ozu are great though. I get the point though, and enjoy Charles Burnett, Barry Jenkins, and Steve McQueen's films

[Anonymous No.14540018]

King is cancelled

[Anonymous No.14540031]

>>14537541
Capitalism BTFO.

[Anonymous No.14540050]

>>14540018

[Anonymous No.14540127]

>>14537551
The funny thing is I don't think they're even talking about the same kind of "quality". King seems to mean the artistic or intrinsic value of a given work, while the woman seems to be mistaking that with budget and cinematic quality, ie how much shine could the filmmakers afford. Frankly I agree with King in this regard. If a piece of art has a good qualities, let those shine, rather than awarding someone merit based on their skin color or some sort of affiliation.
Lord. To think I'd agree with and defend Stephen King... Strange times.

[Anonymous No.14540207]

>>14538096
>mfw I got to that part while reading It in high school
I hate that this is probably what got me into loli stuff. I wasn’t quite familiar with King’s penchant to randomly write hardcore erotica into his stories so I was not prepared at all for the descriptions of the guys running a train on Beverly. I don’t know why but written erotica affects me way more then even videos or comics

[Anonymous No.14540211]

>>14537541
He's right, who fucking cares who wrote what, if its good its good

[Anonymous No.14541284]

>>14539086
>we should instead look at what reviews from critics actually say about movies
critics sell out all the time especially in movies, some "top critic" got cancelled for giving a negative review on rotten tomatoes

agree with the ending of awards shows though

[Anonymous No.14541289]

>>14537541
>>14540018
of course the first people to jump in are white people

[Anonymous No.14541476]

Why do famous authors use Twitter? Socializing with a large audience is a terrible idea, hes made it so doesn't need the attention.

[Anonymous No.14541497]

>>14540018
that weissman faggot is one hell of a CU CK I LMAOED

[Anonymous No.14541506]

I hate women so goddamn much, /lit/. You cant understand how much i hate them.

[Anonymous No.14541509]

>>14540207
>tfw coomer and can only get off from giantess literotica

[Anonymous No.14542194]

>>14540018
Jews Jewing Jews.
>>14540050

[Anonymous No.14542404]

>>14541476
Famous people virtue signaling for trannies, minorities, fuck drumpf etc is good woke marketing to stay relevant though its risky, see JK Rowling

[Anonymous No.14542461]

>>14537843
Him being a nig is irrelevant

[Anonymous No.14542465]

>>14537541
Equality of opportunity =/= equality of outcome. That’s just reality. But the Twitter mobs will continue to delude themselves as usual. There’s no going back folks.

[Anonymous No.14542476]

>>14540207
i read it when i was 19, felt the same as you

[Anonymous No.14542619]

>>14540018
The jew is on it.

[Anonymous No.14542634]

>>14537541
> People should be judged based on merit in my subjective field (art), but not in places where merit can be objectively measured

Lmao, a true artist (retarded)

[Anonymous No.14542645]

>>14537735
>I loathe Marxism and Modernism and Post-Modernism
Opinion discarded
Just like that hack Stephen King's

[Anonymous No.14542658]

>>14541509
based

[Anonymous No.14542684]

>>14538086
Awful shit.

[Anonymous No.14542692]

>>14537541
Remind me why expressing such a simple and obvious opinion is now controversial to the extent it apparently is. How representative is Twitter, anyway?

[Anonymous No.14542699]

>>14537541
Memes aside, can somebody explain to me the "People of Color" meme? It sounds incredibly condescending to everyone who isn't White.

[Anonymous No.14542717]

>>14537541
What a fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.14542728]

>>14542692
Just a warning: don’t watch adverts on television these days if you want to stay sane.

[Anonymous No.14542734]

>>14542728
w-why

[Anonymous No.14542735]

>>14537689
>he thinks the "context" of something is somehow more real than the way people react to it
god you're fucking stupid

[Anonymous No.14543230]

he puckered up faster than when the time fast visited fastville

[Anonymous No.14543251]

>>14542699
Blacks hate the term, obviously.

[Anonymous No.14543465]

>>14537736
>there are loads of good international/non-Hollywood films that get ignored simply because they're not part of the Hollywood clique
This. People got tricked into believeing that Oscars are somehow representative of the world cinema at large. That's a huge misconception - Oscars is a Hollywood internal award that has more cultural relevance than any other national award like César only by virtue of Hollywood being so ubiquitous.

Leftists bitching about Oscars lacking diversity are half-assed if not completely blind, in fact the diversity they won't shut up about is diversity within Hollywood, which is a pretty narrow idea of what diversity means. African, Asian, European and South American movies, no matter how good or diverse they are, have zero chance to win Best Picture thanks to their wrong country of origin. That's however not racist, nationalist or whatever-ist because that's what Oscars are, an award severely limited in scope by design.

The only thing to cry about in the whole affair is this false perception of Oscars as a worldwive cultural maverick it has never tried to be in the first place.

[Anonymous No.14543601]

>amerilards
*inhales*
WOHOHO OH NO NO NOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.14544067]

>>14543601
>A Crafty Arab
She doesn't sound very crafty at all

[Anonymous No.14544075]

>>14543601
>it's simply not possible that I'm a bad artist: my book is not getting published because of le racism xD
black americans cope so hard

[Anonymous No.14544076]

>>14537541
>i only consider quality
>todd philips gets nominated
>greta gerwig doesnt
todd is a fucking hack

[Anonymous No.14544084]

>>14544076
and so is greta, son
she should stick to acting

[Anonymous No.14544090]

>>14544084
no

little women was great

[Anonymous No.14544130]

>>14543601
>I wrote a quality book
lmao
>I wrote a children's book on Ilhan Omar
LMAO
>You have zero idea how to live in my world, where I can't even find one book about Ilhan Omar for my child to read
HAHAHA AHAHAHAHHAHA OH FUCK I'M LAUGHING SO HARD IT HURTS

[Anonymous No.14544270]

>>14542735
You are literally projecting imaginary points into my post. I said that you need to know the context of a tweet before you criticize it. I don't even know what the fuck does it mean to say that the way people react to something is more "real" than its context, you are arguing with your imaginary friend.

[Anonymous No.14544659]

>>14544076
This. Ford V. Ferrari was worthless and nobody got offended when Burning wasn't nominated last year.

[Anonymous No.14544711]

>>14537541
>common sense is now BAYYZD
fuck this gay earth

[Anonymous No.14544713]

I DO NOT understand this thread
We all agree racism exists, right?
We also all agree that oppression can stifle artistic expression, right?
So doesnt it logically follow that looking only for "quality" is only continuing to systematically exclude those who faced or face oppression?

Or do you guys just think women and minorities are inferior?

[Anonymous No.14544728]

>>14540018
>Weissman

>>14544713
It's the last one.