PIERO SCARUFFI'S LITERATURE

[Anonymous No.16914972]

What do you think of Scaruffi's (proto-/mu/ taste guy) list of the best novels?
https://www.scaruffi.com/fiction/best100.html

[Anonymous No.16914990]

>>16914972
bretty good. Kafka, Nabo, Bulgakov a bit overrated though

[Anonymous No.16914992]

how would the trial be anyone's favorite novel?

[Anonymous No.16915004]

>>16914990
All Nabokov's books are so expensive so I don't own anything else except Lolita, do you think they are worth reading other than Lolita?
>>16914992
Isn't it unfinished?

[Anonymous No.16915007]

>>16915004
>Isn't it unfinished?
yes

[Anonymous No.16915010]

>>16915004
Should read Pale Fire and Ada I guess. He is not my favorite but many people love him. I am bit curious about his Russian novels.

[Anonymous No.16915017]

>The fact that so many books still name Moby Dick as "the greatest or most significant or most influential" novel ever only tells you how far literature still is from becoming a serious art

[Anonymous No.16915047]

>>16915017
based

[Anonymous No.16915077]

>>16914972
>The Master and Margherita

[Anonymous No.16915115]

>>16915077
>Margherita
based

[Anonymous No.16915138]

>>16914992
Because it is extremely original and unique and those are some of the primary artistic features that scaruffi judges by.

[Anonymous No.16915173]

>>16914972
Pretty good though overly focused on the 20th and late 19th century (but then again, novels as we understand it appeared only in the 1600s in the West). Surprised to see Murakami there though. His condemnation of Moby Dick here >>16915017 seems strange. Maybe he does emphasize formal innovation too much.

[Anonymous No.16915193]

>>16915077
>The Master and Margherita
>War and Peas
>In Search of Lost Thyme
>The Red and the Black pudding
>A Farewell to Abs
>East of Eating
>Comedenti Resartus
>The Unbearable Lightness of Beans

[Anonymous No.16915194]

>>16915004
Pale Fire completely filtered me but a lot of people seem to love it.

[Anonymous No.16915216]

>>16914972
>best novels in indian
Breh

[Anonymous No.16915220]

>>16915193
>Stoner

[Anonymous No.16915223]

>>16915173
He is a music critic, what do you expect? Also putting Light in the august instead of Faulkner's more experimental books is in contrast to that.

[Anonymous No.16915235]

>>16915173
>his condemnation of moby dick
that line is from his article on the Beatles, it's an old /mu/ meme

[Anonymous No.16915271]

>>16915173
The critique is originally of the beatles, but yeah he does emphasize 'innovation' other aesthetics often

[Anonymous No.16915279]

>>16915193
lmao

[Anonymous No.16915929]

>>16915193
Based

>>16915271
>he does emphasize 'innovation' other aesthetics often
That's a really stupid way to put it because innovation and aesthetics are not opposed terms - they're altogether different things.
Unless by "aesthetics" you mean "making you feel nice".

[Anonymous No.16916061]

>>16914972
Scruffles album list is so fucking retarded

1. Captain Beefheart: Trout Mask Replica
2. Robert Wyatt: Rock Bottom
3. Faust: Faust I
4. Velvet Underground & Nico
5. Doors: The Doors
6. Tim Buckley: Lorca
7 Pere Ubu: Modern Dance
8. Royal Trux: Twin Infinitives
9 John Fahey: Fare Forward Voyagers
10. Nico: Desert Shore

The only acceptable choice in the whole list is the Velvet Underground album. Fucking Royal Trux

[Anonymous No.16916107]

>>16916061
it's interesting how among the art-centred boards /mu/ has the strongest opinions about its subject, yet is also the least capable in explicating those opinions
you fucking nigger

[Anonymous No.16916173]

>>16915223
What does being a music critic have to do with it? Guaranteed he's read more books than almost anyone here

[Anonymous No.16916186]

>>16916061
John Fahey is good

[Anonymous No.16916189]

>>16915173
I think earlier versions of the list were subtitled "Best novels since 1850" so there's a reason for that.

[Anonymous No.16916203]

>>16914972
Who cares? Honestly, how many people outside of 4chan and its sphere of influence even know Scaruffi exists?

[Anonymous No.16916208]

>>16916203
he has a whole Wiki page with quite a bit of detail. Though he may have written that himself kek

[Anonymous No.16916249]

>>16914972
>https://www.scaruffi.com/singular/purchase.html
>The expanded edition contains a lengthy (and frequently boring) history of Artificial Intelligence, with as many references to art, music and other sciences as i could fit in 500 pages. I demystified A.I. as much as possible: the intelligence of machines is vastly exaggerated and, in any case, i don't see what would be wrong with having truly intelligent machines if we could make them (we do have intelligent animals of all sorts, and this would just be a new form of intelligence). I am afraid, instead, that we will soon be surrounded by incredibly stupid machines, not by super-intelligent ones, and that we are increasingly be forced to behave like machines (instead of machines behaving like humans). I mainly wrote the book to talk about the philosophical, sociological and anthropological aspects of the A.I. phenomenon. The Singularity is obviously a new form of religion - nothing wrong with it, just take it for what it is - religion, not science. And what really worries me is not the intelligence of machines but the "vast algorithmic bureaucracies" that we are creating everywhere (with or without machines). A.I. is an effect, not the cause, of a pervasive restructuring of human society and daily life. And much more to argue about!

He's the ultimate fucking pseud and it becomes obvious as soon as he starts to shit out his grandiose verbal diarrhea about a subject you know better than him (you'll easily find one on the website, this midwit fancies himself an expert on everything). By the way, anyone can compile a "greatest" list that looks halfway decent, even pewdiepie managed to not fuck it up,

[Anonymous No.16916259]

>>16916249
>even pewdiepie managed to not fuck it up,
Although Scaruffi did >>16915077 >>16915193, pewdiepie confirmed smarter than Scaruffi.

[Anonymous No.16916295]

>>16916249
what would be your greatest list for novels? Just throwing one together off the top of my head

1. Moby Dick
2. In Search of Lost Time
3. Don Quixote
4. Ulysses
5. War and Peace
6. The Charterhouse of Parma
7. The Metamorphosis
8. The Brothers Karamazov
9. Look Homeward, Angel
10. A Hero of our Times

something like that anyway

[Anonymous No.16916300]

>>16916249
Tell me one thing that is wrong with what Scruffi said.

[Anonymous No.16916311]

>>16916061
>only The Velvets
>not Faust
>not The Doors
>not John Fahey

[Anonymous No.16916323]

>>16916311
Faust is a meme, the Doors are simply bad, and Fahey is good but not goat

[Anonymous No.16916442]

>>16916295
Good job mostly, you got a little sloppy though: Metamorphosis is not a novel. I'd just plagiarize from some other respected lists of classics and college literature syllabi and throw in something like the Cyberiad by Stanislaw Lem to add an original idiosyncratic flavor (something little known, but discussed in academic essays written by well known scholars from outside of literature). A day of honest work if I'm serious about it.
>>16916300
It's written in middle school prose, it's full of murky terms thrown around like they're clear and the claims therefore range from obvious to retarded, you just can't tell. If you don't see it, I don't know what to tell you anon. You can still search Scaruffi's website for your field of expertise, he's guaranteed to have written something stupid about it. Oh yeah, and name an animal that's significantly smarter than humans (so smart we can't figure out what it's doing) and potentially has control over important systems. What a dumb argument.

[Anonymous No.16916467]

>>16916442
I know it's a novella but I find it kind of a meme to separate them from novels. There is a clear difference between a short story and a novel, somewhere in the meme-area between them you have novellas, but their form resembles novels more than short stories.

[Anonymous No.16916475]

>>16916467
fair enough

[Anonymous No.16916680]

Disagree on Buddenbrooks, Brothers Karamazov and Master and Margharita, agree fully on Rabelais, Cervantes, Kafka and Stendhal.

[Anonymous No.16916702]

>>16916173
His list is no more legitimate than some people who post here. There are a lot of meme picks like /lit/. His music taste also makes him look like a hipster.

[Anonymous No.16916721]

>>16915138
It's monotonous as shit. How is it original even compared to Kafka's other stories

[Anonymous No.16917142]

>>16916295
If I were writing am objective list it would be

1. The Holy Bible
2. The Odyssey
3.Moby Dick
4. Don Quixote
5. Anna Karena
6. Ulysses
7. In Search of Lost Time
8. The Heart of Darkness
9. A Tale of Two Cities
10. 100 Years of Solitude

[Anonymous No.16917148]

>>16914972
Scaruffi is such a pseudo. He rates and reviews albums without listening to them and just goes off other reviews of them. Ge clearly cares more not for innovation but how innovative it sounds, like he doesn't respect Pet Sounds but jizzes over The Doors self titled which pretty much just copied Dylan

[Anonymous No.16917752]

>>16915173
>His condemnation of Moby Dick here
Go away, newfag. He likes Moby-Dick, it’s on his list it’s higher then Proust, that paragraph is a meme.

[Anonymous No.16917757]

>>16917142
>Odyssey instead of Iliad
Retard alert
> Ana Karena
Retard confirmed

[Anonymous No.16917762]

>>16915017
Surely the /lit/ equivalent would be maestro saying this about Shakespeare. Moby-Dick is popular on /lit/ but it filters too many normalfags to be like the beetles

[Anonymous No.16917766]

>>16917142
>1. The Holy Bible
Importance is not reflective of quality, cryptojew

[Anonymous No.16917787]

>>16914972
Bronte is a good writer, but superficial kitsch.

First place should go to Cervantes, second place to Tristram Shandy (remove Bronte), 3rd place to Ulysses, Rabelais or Flaubert. These are the authors and books who shaped the novel as we know it, revealing to us its possibilities and limits.

Also, no Proust, no Tolstoy?
Scaruffi has good taste and is obviously very widely read, but also quite idiosyncratic and the list is almost certainly based more on his own inclinations and prejudices than on serious aesthetic judgement. There is no way someone can seriously believe that Wuthering Heights is better than Anna Karenina or Tristram Shandy. Also, I am pretty sure his prejudices had some influence - for instance, his essay on Nietzsche is simply a laughable instance of not knowing how to adapt yourself to someone whose modes of thinking are radically different from yours.

[Anonymous No.16917830]

>>16914972
the chronological lists of literature like this https://www.scaruffi.com/fiction/scandina.html
are good pointers actually

[Anonymous No.16917869]

>>16916721
Did you read a translated version?

[Anonymous No.16918354]

>>16914972
>no Flaubert
>Emily Brönte

He takes only his taste in consideration for these books. No objective criteria. He's just a fucking encyclopedia. Let's put him back to /mu/ where he belongs.

[Anonymous No.16918355]

>>16917787
He is a pseud music critic. The fact that he has made and published a list like this is testament to that.

[Anonymous No.16918367]

>>16915193
>A Farewell to Abs

Ok, you got me, anon

[Anonymous No.16918376]

>>16916061
>5. Doors: The Doors
More than ever seen

[Anonymous No.16918383]

>>16914972
>Why is it illegal to marry a 12-year old? Helen of Troy was 12. Juliet and Cleopatra were still teenagers when they became famous. Most heroines of classic novels and poems were underage by today's laws. Thomas Edison married a 16-year-old. I am not advocating anything, just stating facts. Medical studies show that the best age for a woman to have children is between 15 and 25 (lowest chances of miscarriage, of birth defects and, last but not least, of the woman dying while giving birth); while the worst age is after the mid 30s. And the younger you are, the more likely you are to cement a real friendship with your children; the older you are, the more likely that the "generational gap" will hurt your children's psychology. Therefore it is more "natural" to have a child at 16 than at 36. In countless countries of the world women have their first child at a very young age, and stop having children at a relatively young age. This is all illegal today in the USA, while it is perfectly legal to get pregnant at 40 or (thanks to medical progress) even at 70.
Based but still a hyclic.

[Anonymous No.16918397]

>>16914972
did he change this? i think i remember this being way more contrarian

[Anonymous No.16918417]

>>16914972
where's that pic which proves he isn't the reviewer of the stuff on his site

[Anonymous No.16918513]

>>16914972
Decent overall favourites list, but pic related proves he is a massive fraud

[Anonymous No.16918524]

>>16918513
How so?

[Anonymous No.16918529]

>>16915193

>Ada lot

[Anonymous No.16920275]

>>16918513
all his lists are ridiculous

[Anonymous No.16920307]

>>16916061
nah, the only good choice is Nico - Desertshore.

[Anonymous No.16920315]

>>16914972
There's no way he knows over12 languages

[Anonymous No.16920754]

>>16916061
>>16916323
>>16920307
Filtered

[Anonymous No.16920774]

>>16915193
>A Farewell to Abs
Impressive. Very nice.

[Anonymous No.16920794]

>>16915010
They're probably not great. I've read Glory which is one of his earlier novels it was legitimately crap.

[Anonymous No.16920978]

>>16917762
This. And his praising of Cervantes is the equivalent of Scaruffi's praise of TVU

[Anonymous No.16921034]

>>16916061
those albums are fucking amazing though

[Anonymous No.16921480]

scaruffi's only good thing is his rock guide and his extremely truthful critique to the beatles that makes beatlepseuds seethe to this day

[Anonymous No.16921760]

>>16915004
All of Nabby's oeuvre is worth anon. Go for it.

[Anonymous No.16921788]

>>16914972
Just read his poetry to see how humongous a hack he is

https://www.scaruffi.com/poetry.html

[Anonymous No.16921791]

>>16915138
that's exactly it, it's honestly the only thing he judges by, mostly originality. I found a lot of good albums through him, but I don't really enjoy how he judges them. Although it is probably the most objective way to rate art.

[Anonymous No.16921883]

>>16916323
>the Doors are simply bad
jesus. imagine being this soulless and gay.

[Anonymous No.16921901]

>>16914972
>the trial at #1
based

[Anonymous No.16922854]

>>16921791
I really dont know where that meme comes from,scaruffi has it written in his fucking website that he rates soul,ability to deliver emotion

[Anonymous No.16922875]

>>16914972
>the trial #1
no

[Anonymous No.16922885]

>>16921883
The Doors are the most soulless fakeass shit from that era

[Anonymous No.16922906]

>>16922885
that's the beatles

[Anonymous No.16923772]

>>16917142
Pretty good, I would swap the last 3 out with Faust, Canterbury tales and something shakespeare related though. I know none of those are novels but neither is the odyssey and you included that

[Anonymous No.16923782]

These are his favorite poets
1. Eliot
2. Rilke
3. Paz
4. Yeats
5. Pessoa
6. Heaney
7. Pound
8. Montale
9. Valery
10. Garcia Lorca
11. Majakovskij

https://www.scaruffi.com/fiction/histpoet.html

[Anonymous No.16923806]

>>16916061
>Fucking Royal Trux
It's always the one that filters the plebs.

[Anonymous No.16923821]

>>16923782
Pretty based actually, but Oaz and García Lorca are second rate. Quevedo, Vallejo and Darío are much better.

[Anonymous No.16924029]

>>16923782
>Eliot above Rilke, Yeats, Pound
pleb

[Anonymous No.16924057]

>>16918529
kek