/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1778818]

That feel when you don't really hate women, but kind of do and it's eating you up inside and you want to stop hating them but can't

[Anonymous No.1778819]

I don't hate women. I hate traits that are to often found in women.

[Anonymous No.1778820]

I think you might of happened upon this area by accident because I fear that /v/ is the other way. Please find yourself disposed to your bearings and depart

[Anonymous No.1778824]

ITT: 4chons
>>1778818
>>1778819
Overgeneralizes based on his fears in approaching humans of the opposite gender
>>1778820
>might of

What is wrong with you people, enroll in university or something and get a life

Oh wait, you're US-Americans, you can't afford to go to uni! ahahahhahahahahaa

(Also, haha CAPTCHA for giving me greek)

[Anonymous No.1778825]

>>1778820
I've never been on /v/ before, is it more misogynistic than this place? Also I am asking for genuine advice.

[Anonymous No.1778828]

>>1778824
>implying americans go to 'uni' and not 'college
>implying the post-secondary system isn't set up to accommodate the academic and financial needs of the poor and stupid

I enjoy making fun of Americans as much as the next anon, but you've gotta step up your game.

[Anonymous No.1778831]

>>1778824
I believe you have missed the point of the post. Try to be more civil for that is how we roll on this board.. motherfucker

[Anonymous No.1778838]

what is the self-conscious misogynist?

[Anonymous No.1778841]

That feel when you're a woman feminist but hate postmodernism, structuralism, Lacan, Hegel, Marx, and Paglia

[Anonymous No.1778842]

I no longer feel hate because I've done a lot to disregard my emotions, controllable and uncontrollable.

[Anonymous No.1778846]

>>1778841
what woman feminist in her right mind doesn't hate camille paglia

i mean unless you just respect a successful troll

anyway let's all sage and report this boring /r9k/ spore that's floated onto our nice board for people who like having intelligent discussions about animorphs, ender's game sequels, and the 11th grade ap english test

[Anonymous No.1778856]

>mfw I treat women with the same bland disregard that I afford everyone else I meet.

[Anonymous No.1778860]

>>1778856
Hi, Henry Higgins.

[Anonymous No.1778867]

>>1778860
Women are irrational, that's all there is to that!
There heads are full of cotton, hay, and rags!
They're nothing but exasperating, irritating,
vacillating, calculating, agitating,
Maddening and infuriating hags!

[Anonymous No.1778909]

We can't have a good misogyny thread without some Schopenhauer:

>One needs only to see the way she is built to realize that woman is not intended for great mental or for great physical labor. She expiates the guilt of life not through activity but through suffering, through the pains of childbirth, caring for the child and subjection to the man, to whom she should be a patient and cheering companion. Great suffering, joy, exertion, is not for her: her life should flow by more quietly, trivially, gently than the man's without being essentially happier or unhappier.

>Women are suited to being the nurses and teachers of our earliest childhood precisely because they themselves are childish, silly and short-sighted, in a word big children, their whole lives long: a kind of intermediate stage between the child and the man, who is the actual human being, ‘man.’

>Nor can one expect anything else from women if one considers that the most eminent heads of the entire sex have proved incapable of a single truly great, genuine and original achievement in art, or indeed of creating anything at all of lasting value: this strikes one most forcibly in regard to painting, since they are just as capable of mastering its technique as we are, and indeed paint very busily, yet cannot point to a single great painting; the reason being precisely that they lack all objectivity of mind, which is what painting demands above all else. Isolated and partial exceptions do not alter the case: women, taken as a whole, are and remain thorough and incurable philistines: so that, with the extremely absurd arrangement by which they share the rank and title of their husband, they are a continual spur to his ignoble ambitions. They are sexus sequior, the inferior second sex in every respect: one should be indulgent toward their weaknesses, but to pay them honour is ridiculous beyond measure and demeans us even in their eyes.

[Anonymous No.1778912]

That feel when you report and sage for r9k bullshit.

[Anonymous No.1778917]

>>1778909
I mostly agree with that, except the part about art. Women can definitely create timeless and amazing art, just not when they are trying to create man's art. All the standard expectations and techniques were developed by men, so if a woman uses them her art will necessarily be an imitation. If a woman plays her own game, then truly great art can be created. Women live in a powerfully emotional realm. If they learn through hard work how to channel that in their own way, they can create moving works.

[Anonymous No.1778919]

>>1778912
>saging on /lit/

[Anonymous No.1778924]

>>1778917
and that's exactly why Schpenhauer added this part: "isolated and partial exceptions do not alter the case".

The truth is, when you think about the so-called "great" or influential artists in any field, you will mostly be thinking of men. In some fields, you will probably ONLY think of men (like sculpting).

[Anonymous No.1778934]

>>1778924
bro, have you read a room for one's own? somewhere in the wtfamireadingstreamofconsciouscrap VJay Woolf is all like, 'nigga, no one ever gave us bitches a chance.' not that I completely agree anyway, since men are usually more motivated to step out of the norm (which art usually requires). also, in some ways, a room for one's own is just a book of whining.

whatever. whose to say this high arts crap is really the pinnacle of humanity. just seems to me like these old guys with their books have spent so much of their life reading and painting that they can't see the use in much else. personally, i think a human's worth is based on the size of their rock collection. oh, you don't have any blue apatite in yours? lol faggot.

[Anonymous No.1778936]

>>1778934
Yeah I saw that but I am not trying to point out exceptions. I am saying that women can create great art, if they approach it honestly and in a medium they can excel in. Like singing, for instance. Sculpting is a mans medium.

[Anonymous No.1778939]

>>1778936
Singing is not art. Composing is. Now think of the best composers that pop into your head?

All men, right?

[Anonymous No.1778943]

>>1778934
Your post makes no sense whatsoever, and is devoid of all rationality so I'm just going to assume you're either a woman or a man on some very strong drugs.

[Anonymous No.1778944]

>>1778939
Singing is not art? That is absurd. That statement made me cringe. I don't think you have a clue.

Singing is not just hitting notes. It is the art of conveying emotions with your voice. Hell, give me some lyrics and a melody and I could probably hit most of the notes. Doesn't mean I'm a good singer.

[Anonymous No.1778945]

>>1778939
you've completely ignored modern short song composition. pro-tip, it's still composition, even if there's less.

[Anonymous No.1778946]

>>1778944
Also, let me add a few analogies to strengthen my point:

Playing the Violin is not an art, composing is.
Painting is not an art, composition is.
Dance is not an art, choreography is.

[Anonymous No.1778948]

>>1778946
uff da

[Anonymous No.1778949]

>>1778946
>a few analogies
>few analogies
>analogies
>anal

nice argument there bro

[spoiling] sage because i was just fulfilling my puerile humor [/spoiler]

[Anonymous No.1778951]

>>1778944
So art is conveying emotions? Now that made ME cringe.
And singing is not art because the voice is a musical instrument. So when Vladimir Ashkenazy played Rachmaninoffs 3rd piano concerto he wasn't making or creating art because the artist was the composer of the piece, not the interpreter.

>>1778945
Composition is a form of art, but not all composition is art.

[Anonymous No.1778952]

>>1778949
>mfw i'm not even drunk right now and i still fail at both spoilers and saging
>mfw i remember i actually have been drinking

[Anonymous No.1778955]

>>1778951
>Composition is a form of art, but not all composition is art.

except, you know, that's just your opinion. 20 years from now when all the old ivory tower dwellers and you have been replaced by new ironic ivory tower dwellers Kesha will be the new high-art tea music, Banksy-re-prints will cover their office-walls, and they'll be correct, because their arbitrary opinion is now more prevalent than your arbitrary opinion.

[Anonymous No.1778956]

>>1778951
Bah, I don't mean to sound rude but it is pretty obvious you are not an artist, or even really appreciative of art. Your view of art is sterile and mechanical, based on nothing. I'm not going to argue further anyway, some things people have to learn on their own. Sorry if that sounds demeaning.

[Anonymous No.1778970]

>>1778956
Demeaning? No, it just sounds like you don't have an argument at all and so resort to personal insults. Oh well...

But you're right, I'm not an artist. As for the appreciation of art, I really am sorry that we'll never meet just so you could see how wrong you are. I've playing the piano since I was 5 and the guitar since I was about 9 or 10. I have a deep appreciation for music, ALL music, and for other forms of art as well, especially literature and cinema.

[Anonymous No.1778977]

>>1778970
I'm not the guy you're responding too, but I think he's right. One day, probably not too far from now, you're going to wake up and realise that you've been an idiot, that you've been defining 'art' through antiquated limiting means, that the things you actually find enjoyable and meaningful extend far beyond what is complex, well-respected, time-tested, avant-garde and so on; and when all that hits you, you'll face palm. You'll look back on this thread, and you'll simply say "shit." With that said and done, you'll have finally grown up, and you'll like art a hell of a lot more.

Your reaction now is to get defensive etc. But that's how all of us were when we were you. These things just work out when they do. It's like getting over adolescent awkwardness or quitting WoW.

[Anonymous No.1778987]

>>1778977
Your reaction now is to get defensive

I won't get defensive as I love to debate things like this. One of the many reason I come to 4chan.

>that you've been defining 'art' through antiquated limiting means

I have absolutely no idea where you got this from. Because I said singing is not art? If that's it, then all I can is that, as you probably alreay know, all art is subjective and therefore has no exact definition. Well, singing does not qualify to be included in MY own definition of art is. I hardly think that makes my views on art any less valid than yours or "antiquated" and "limited"

>that the things you actually find enjoyable and meaningful extend far beyond what is complex, well-respected, time-tested, avant-garde and so on

Again, I don't know where you got this impression from, as I absolutely agree with this sentence. There are things I enjoy (some of which have been time-tested) and some I don't. But even the ones I don't, I still give them a chance and I don't criticize what I don't understand. I just say I don't like them.

>t's like getting over adolescent awkwardness or quitting WoW.

My adolescent days are long gone, and I have never played WoW or any other MMO for that matter.

[hence 72 No.1778997]

will those in the ivory towers be contemplating hence72.blogspot.com

[Anonymous No.1779002]

>>1778909
How did Schopenhauer deal with the obvious argument that his society didn't give women the same opportunities as men in education etc and generally relegated them to domestic duties, so expecting any more than 'isolated and partial exceptions' to produce great art (or for people to find out about it if they did) would be a little... unrealistic? What did he say about that?

[Anonymous No.1779009]

>>1778987

oh god it's every art school freshman ever

[Anonymous No.1779010]

>>1779002
>How did Schopenhauer deal with the obvious argument that his society didn't give women the same opportunities as men in education etc and generally relegated them to domestic duties

I don't think he said anything, but if he had he probably would have said that they were damn right in doing so, given the deceitful and manipulative nature of women.

You have to remember that Schopenhauer defended that the life of a woman was more suited to attending to others and taking care of them. He also thought that women should not concern themselves with anything that required great mental exertion, so I think he probably thought it justified that women were not allowed a higher education.

[Anonymous No.1779012]

/r9k/ lives on in the hearts and minds of every 4chan poster

it is the martyred board

[Anonymous No.1779013]

>>1778987
My statement:
>that you've been defining 'art' through antiquated limiting means

Did not come from your assertion that singing is not an art. I can see where you are coming from in that regard, as the voice box is an instrument, it would be akin to saying the paint pigments on a composition are 'the art' rather than how they've been put together. Instead, my assertion came from this statement:

>Composition is a form of art, but not all composition is art.

Which suggests (assuming it is you - if not, ignore the rest, because the whole argument then comes down to the dangers of posting on an anonymous board) that you believe some things are not worthy of being labeled 'art'.

My opinion that you're using antiquated views arises from the fact that the aforementioned statement of yours (again, assuming it was you) was a response to someone else who asserted that you have been ignoring modern music when you said that the first composers to come to mind are male, whereby your disregard of that post implies that modern, shorter pieces are not 'art' - because they do not fit your current schema of art.

Thus I say your views are antiquated because in my experience, the kind of people who think that Rachmaninov is art whereas Kanye West is not , are the same kind of people who've yet to grow past old-man notions of art.

[Anonymous No.1779015]

Singing is an art:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfUSLFBfDRY

Dancing is an art:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_Uv4EEfWu8

Playing an instrument is an art:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6yuR8efotI

If any of those performances had been less, it wouldn't matter how good the composition was. None of those performances were just dialed in recreations of the original composition, they gave life to them. There is so much more to performance art then just trudging through the composition.

[Anonymous No.1779017]

>assuming it is you

It is and it was me who said that.

>that you believe some things are not worthy of being labeled 'art'.

I do believe. Again, some things don't fit what I define as being art. Your view of art may be broader and I understand if you wish to call mine "limited" but there is no real right or wrong here. Just different definitions of something that cannot be defined or typified.

>you have been ignoring modern music when you said that the first composers to come to mind are male, whereby your disregard of that post implies that modern, shorter pieces are not 'art' - because they do not fit your current schema of art.

What I said was that composition is a form art. So modern composition is also a form of art. Although I still believe that just because some writes something it can be called art. I write music all the time, but I'm certanly no artist.

>your views are antiquated because in my experience, the kind of people who think that Rachmaninov is art whereas Kanye West is not , are the same kind of people who've yet to grow past old-man notions of art.

This is some freaky coincidence. Today, I came to work listening to Devil In a New Dress on my ipod. I enjoy Kanye Wests music, just like I enjoy Nas, Wu-Tang and Raekwons solo stuff. Certanly not as much as I enjoy Rachmaninoff but when it to comes to enterntainment and art I find it wise not to close any doors. I'll give everything a chance at least once.

As for the "old man notions of art" I think there is something to be said about those notions, as anyone would be hard pressed to argue that innovation, originality and general cultural and artistic output today is as strong as it was in some periods in the past.

[Anonymous No.1779033]

>Your view of art may be broader and I understand if you wish to call mine "limited" but there is no real right or wrong here.

That's all me and the other guy were getting at. It's not to say that we are right, but chances are your world of art will expand too as you grow older. Thus he gave up on arguing against you that singing is art, because you can't see it now, you probably will in the end (though maybe not), and it's pretty hard to convince someone to expand their world view through online argument.

>anyone would be hard pressed...

This brings up a different point, and you could be right. It might be that people just don't work as hard as they used to, that art is stagnant or whatever. Lately though, I've been getting the feeling that the world is just over saturated with creation - that there's an abundance of amazing stuff out there, possibly more than ever, but because we have so much of it we fail to give it the time we gave old art - In the past only it was mostly the rich who could afford the luxury of creation, and so we spent forever appreciating the few things they gave us, listening to Zep IV on loop for a year, repeating Rimbaud for decades, discussing Homer for thousands of years - and it is this time, this effort of appreciation which makes us love them so much (a sort of cognitive dissonance mechanism or what have you). Nowadays art changes so fast and there's too much of it, so we download it, play it once, and say fuck it - it was OK - I guess, I just remember a time when I was little and I could pick up ANY album or book, consume it for months on end, and I'd love it; but now I struggle to give things a third or even second chance. I don't know. All I know is I'm sobering up and it's past my bed time.

[Stoferin No.1779125]

>>1778867
(because it was there.)

http://audioboo.fm/boos/359136-superior-running-scripts

[Anonymous No.1779129]

>>1778939
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellie_Greenwich

>I like motown. Apologies.

[Anonymous No.1779138]

This thread AGAIN? Stay classy, /r9k/fags.

[Anonymous No.1779147]

I'm a lesbian because I hate men.

[Anonymous No.1779162]

>>1778841
> Femminist
> Implying atypical feminisim
> Lists modern cultural theorists she hates
> All men

[Anonymous No.1779167]

I prefer women to men.

[Anonymous No.1779170]

>>1778917
> "Women's art" : symbolic vaginas or statements about their bodies.
> "Man's art" : everything else.