/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17938203]

Well, /lit/?

[Anonymous No.17938216]

>>17938203
Depends on what you mean by "better person".
Not reading the classics is 100% certain not to have a positive effect on you though.

[Anonymous No.17938226]

>>17938203
I think you should stay on Twitter.

[Anonymous No.17938231]

I think it does. What now?

[Anonymous No.17938243]

>twitter screencap thread
OP, do the world a favour and jump off the nearest bridge.

[Anonymous No.17938255]

>>17938203
This, so much this. My wife’s son loved this Tweet.

[Anonymous No.17938260]

[Anonymous No.17938275]

>>17938203
i unironically think it does, at least short term it genuinely boosts my sense of empathy for other people, makes me more willing to consider their perspectives and reasons why they are the way they are, it refreshes your memory of the internal complexity and diversity of human experience. Also is a good way to step outside of the unending media psyop carnival that has become contemporary public discourse. They had their own psyops back then but it was at least a different set of psyops.

[Anonymous No.17938282]

The classics are usually pretty trash though. The only good books are philosophy, nonfiction, and fantasy/sci-fi.

[Anonymous No.17938331]

>>17938203
I wonder about this sentiment.

I think people who say this believe in some kind of humanism, in the sense that they believe that reading books can make you a better person. Just different books, and not the classics.

Or do they think that reading anything will better you, not just the classics? They're interesting in being inclusive etc.

There is a third option, which is that reading will not make you a better person, but it's hard to think that people who allege themselves to read would believe that.

[Anonymous No.17938388]

>>17938203
>Not even making a fullstop.

Fucking whore.

[Anonymous No.17938433]

>>17938203
If this implies that all literature is equivalent, this is the biggest cope I've seen in a while. Keep reading trivial trash all you want, but at least don't claim it's anywhere near the artistic and intellectual heights reached by classics.

[Anonymous No.17938457]

this is the book equivalent of getting turned down by a chick and saying "you ain't shit anyways hoe".
needless to say, filtered.

[Anonymous No.17938470]

>>17938203
Reading them might not make you a batter person. But not reading them sure as fuck will make you a worse one.

[Anonymous No.17938484]

>>17938388
it's not a sentence. a post online is more like a slogan or a brand image. it doesn't need a full stop

[Anonymous No.17938493]

>>17938203
Who tried to be a 'better person'? Who tried to accomplish that by reading the classics?

[Anonymous No.17938497]

>>17938203
Ban all twitter posters

[Anonymous No.17938542]

Reading tweets makes you a dumber person.

[Anonymous No.17938667]

>>17938203
>reading the finest works of literature does not make you a better person

shit opinion coming from t*itter "books"

[Anonymous No.17938697]

>>17938203
I think this is based on the American mindset that they feel inferior to people who have read the classics or know other languages.

[Anonymous No.17938710]

>>17938226
/thread

[Anonymous No.17938712]

>>17938203
What does it even mean? Is this just an ad to buy some modern books?
Because reading any book doesnt make you a better person, only if you are able to take some lesson or insight from them.
But they became a classic, this means they are good or have some helpfull things. Reading a classic gives me a higher chance to become a better person.

[Anonymous No.17938713]

A lot of classics are shit. Most of the literature worth reading is stuff that doesn’t appear on “100 best books lists.” The idea of classics is for normies to consume to feel cultured.

[Anonymous No.17938721]

>>17938282
Classics are very good if you want to see the progenitors of western storytelling; but, because of how old they are, they can also be a very dry read.

[Anonymous No.17938730]

>>17938721
Bait

[Anonymous No.17938765]

>>17938730
Ok

[Anonymous No.17938802]

>>17938275
Same, anon. I could name a few novels that actually changed how I think of things like time and memory and the inner workings of other people. It's necessary that the reader genuinely engages with the work though, as some readers will plough through a book in search of plot points just to be able to say they read it, without it having any impact on them. The tweet in the OP is a lame pseudo-"gotcha" still, as it suggests no one could become a better person by reading the classics, or any book for that matter.

[Anonymous No.17938807]

>>17938713
Hi, author who is angry that his book is not bought.

[Anonymous No.17938850]

>>17938713
True for some. I love Faulkner but I couldn’t stand Frankenstein

[Anonymous No.17938918]

>>17938807
Not even remotely the case, nice try though

[Anonymous No.17938959]

>>17938203

[Anonymous No.17938962]

>>17938203
That's true, but the real meaning of this statement, which is "actually the classics are overrated" is false because they are underrated.

[Anonymous No.17938968]

#facts
take a motherfucking seat and leave my people alone

[Anonymous No.17939023]

>>17938968
How much actual value does this guy add to society bros? Has to be negative.

[Anonymous No.17939029]

>>17938968
Lmao

[Anonymous No.17939039]

>>17938260
this

[Anonymous No.17939084]

>>17938203
Working for the company that's poisoning public discourse doesn't make you a good person either.
The worst platform, removing all context for a discussion (with the character limit) is simply awful.

[Anonymous No.17939102]

>>17938968
I can call that guy a faggot in all of his 12 languages too

[Anonymous No.17939172]

>>17938282
>The only good books are philosophy, nonfiction, and fantasy/sci-fi.
Peak bugman opinion.