/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18851151]

>new books bad
>old books good

[Anonymous No.18851157]

>>18851151
Um sweaty, it’s called the lindy effect and it’s currently based.

[Anonymous No.18851277]

Fpbp

[Anonymous No.18851320]

>>18851151
Since
>past good
>present bad
sums up the past 100+ years of history, I dont see why it shouldnt apply books also.

[Anonymous No.18851513]

>>18851151
the old books which are remembered are generally the good ones

[Anonymous No.18851609]

>>18851151
yes, unironically

[Anonymous No.18851624]

>old books bad
>new books good

[Anonymous No.18851637]

>>18851151
Yes. We remember only the greatest works. We do not remember shit.
But today you cannot remember only the best, you will see and experience shitness. And 99% is shit.
In the future we will filter today's works by greatness, but it takes time.
Before that, read old books that were filtered by greatness.

[Anonymous No.18851638]

>>18851151
>new books bad
Yes, more than 99% of them.
>old books good
Most of them were bad, but time filtered those.

[Anonymous No.18851977]

>>18851638
basically this

[Anonymous No.18851996]

>books good

[Anonymous No.18852001]

>we remember greatness
That's actually a false conception

We believe that we remember what deserves to be, when truly we remember what is popular.

There are countless (if not the majority) of great people who couldn't permeate, because they didn't say what people wanted to hear.

The normies have fucked up the one job they should have not. Most great men have been filtered.

[Anonymous No.18852005]

>>18851996
books bad.

[Anonymous No.18853217]

Yes

[Anonymous No.18853251]

>664.jpg

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18853363]

>>18851151
>E.T. Post groan