Books aren't cool anymore

[Anonymous No.14673182]

Books used to be about adventure, philosophy and stuff.
Now all books are about feminism, gay shit and leftist propaganda.
The authors used to be really smart people, adventurers, philosophers, even emperors.
Now they are a bunch of gay fags, secular jews and literal beta cucks.


You can buy these new """books""" if you wanna, I am sticking to the classics.

[Anonymous No.14673244]

you talk like a ben shapiro debate youtube compilation, something tells me your opinion is not based on reality but on your feelings

[Anonymous No.14673384]

>>14673182
Shut the fuck up you stupid whinging faggot

[Anonymous No.14673401]

>>14673182
Shut the fuck up incel.

[Anonymous No.14673449]

>>14673182
Die! FUCK YOU!

[Anonymous No.14673461]

They hated him because he was to based

[Anonymous No.14673831]

>>14673244
>>14673384
>>14673401
>>14673449
Why are you guys so mad?

[cunt No.14673846]

>>14673182
>I don't agree with the political positions of the author so the book is objectively bad

[Anonymous No.14673863]

You know he does kind of have a point. A lot of great works of literature are actually pretty riveting yarns when you think about their actual plots.

Think of the Iliad:
>Huge fucking battle, tenth and final year of the Trojan War, epic clashes between demigods and gods on the battlefield

Or Paradise Lost:
>Titanic scale drama between God, angels, devils, and the first humans, culminates in the extreme drama of the Fall

Or even Hamlet:
>Intense psychological drama of the ultimate human being brooding and murdering his way through five acts culminating in a swordfight

You wouldn't call any of these stories "boring." Sure, they're full of beautiful language, incredibly deep characters, and lots of interesting philosophical discussion. But as actual plots they're pretty riveting, too. We seem to have lost some of that with more modern literature.

[Anonymous No.14673917]

>>14673182
The issue is that books are now products for mass-consumption. The stuff targeted at teenage girls, i.e. Hunger Games, Harry Potter, Twilight, drowns out anything good that may be published. We used to have awards and lists of recent books that were good enough to read, but those got very politicized. Nepotism and pushing some sort of political agenda are the main factors behind getting, say, the Pulitzer prize. But we also don't have much concern ourselves for sifting through modern books, because we know that there are hundreds of books from the past that we should read.

If you want to reverse this process, you need some kind of sub-community that is able to share books it likes with each other. Political sects do this, and prop up each others books. You'll see how news anchors mention one of their guest's books, if they like the guy. There are also websites for this. There's a far-right/third-position website called countercurrents which is basically all about books they like. Marxists have a stronger footing in academic settings, so they can also talk about people like Zizek in multiple places. I've noticed that centrist political books are the same sort of mass-consumption books that I started off this post complaining about.

[Anonymous No.14673932]

What is the modern equivalent of the old pulp magazines? I just want to read fun adventure stories set in interesting worlds.

[Anonymous No.14674167]

>>14673182
>Books used to be about adventure, philosophy and stuff.
Boring
>Now all books are about feminism, gay shit and leftist propaganda.
Unironically based

[Anonymous No.14674192]

>>14673182
imagine thinking people like you get to have any say in deciding what’s ”cool”

[Anonymous No.14674209]

>>14673182
Yeah, I agree with you. The point is that the stories stopped being about cool shit happening and became political instruments to further some agenda. You can't have a racist character not being a villain, for example, cause people will see it as a projection of the author. This is why I just read the classics as well.

[Anonymous No.14674219]

>>14673831
They know deep down that all modern literature is pulp trash

[Anonymous No.14674237]

>>14673461
When did /lit/ became infested by faggots like them?

[Anonymous No.14674247]

>>14674167
cringed irl

[Anonymous No.14674249]

>>14674237
I don't know. Everyone always recommended to start with the Greeks and ignore modern lit back in around 2013.

[Anonymous No.14674426]

>>14673917
I think it would be ineffective to try big publishers, so I'll aim for niche ones like countercurrents - which has some awesome books, btw.

[Anonymous No.14674479]

>>14673932
I second this. It'd be nice to know.

[Anonymous No.14674839]

>>14673182
guess you were just born in le wrong generation lmao

[Anonymous No.14675594]

>>14674839
this

[Anonymous No.14675725]

>>14673182
I just read a Ha Jin short story collection and am in the middle of a Franzen novel. It's hilarious and sad the amount of sex references that get included. It makes me question if it's a method to get the book sold or just a manifestation of a sign of ironic repression since the sexual revolution.

[Anonymous No.14675857]

Identity politics in general is very hot right now. And that has got to have some influence on literature.

[Anonymous No.14676033]

>>14675857
I think literature died after the 1940s, maybe even earlier except for a few exceptions like John Williams or Pynchon. Franzen, Chabon, Tartt, and not even Roth aren't on par with Dostoevsky.

[Anonymous No.14676104]

>>14676033
I set the cut-off date at 2000, but 1949 could be a good cut-off for the decline of literature too.

[Anonymous No.14676127]

>>14673384
Your just reading the wrong books friendo.

[Anonymous No.14676144]

>>14673182
>Books used to be about adventure, philosophy and stuff.
Agreed, but your second part about why is cringe and misunderstanding the root of the aids. There being gays and feminism isn’t the problem, if it’s built well it’s completely fine. The root problem is insincere postmodernism without rigour. I believe that postmodernists thought has become so widespread it’s become a little self defeating, at least again in its more pedestrian forms. I don’t mind the noble savage writing of 1800’s because it was relevantly topical and expectation breaking to the intended reader. Nowadays, I assume the colonizing faction of a story will necessarily be the bad guy, so presenting it like this is a brave stance is hollow. And such a lot of the literature is specifically produced for the people who explicitly endorse the main message it often turns into a lot of half truth scapegoating messaging. It’s not about challenging your beliefs anymore it’s about feeling the unearned vindication of it by challenging the beliefs of your immediate predisessors.

[Anonymous No.14676153]

It is a selection bias effect. Not every writer was Kant and Goethe either. There was a lot of stuff we forget. Likewise people in the future will remember some writing now that no one on this board is reading at the moment most likely as a similiar effect.