/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19995899]

Why do Millennials detest this opinion?

[Anonymous No.19995900]

>>19995899
Because the freak never cut his god damned fingernails

[Anonymous No.19995903]

>>19995900
deleuze war ein dadash mit der kalash xD

[Anonymous No.19995904]

I think they believe the universal exists in the particular.

[Anonymous No.19995907]

Reminds millenials their lives arent that interesting and are walking mediocrities with no imagination

[Anonymous No.19995976]

Just a simple and accessible economic network becoming ready at hand to all from the early 90s whereby you can not only prostitute your body, but also your mind and soul by the press of a button. Why waste time and money on education or setting up a business if enough people pay just to have access to random strangers :|

[Anonymous No.19995998]

>>19995899
Is he referring to Dave Eggers?

[Anonymous No.19996038]

Do they? Most millennial fiction seems to be about Ragthok, Chief Dragon-fucker of King Strongbald IX, Ruler of the Sexgore Empire.

[Anonymous No.19996041]

>>19995899
That's why art are all increasingly abstract, experimental, metaphorical or whatever they say now. Experiences all around the same, and the stuff have to be about expression.

[Anonymous No.19996049]

>>19995899
How do you objectively measure artistic standard?
Seems like bullshit desu.

[Anonymous No.19996119]

>>19995899
This like the most popular opinion among millennials. They're the ones that initially got on facebook when it started, saw it infested with dumbasses over the age 45, saw how fucking dumb social media is, so they never really joined twitter or instagram when they showed up.

[Anonymous No.19996124]

>>19995899
But Deleuze wrote a whole monograph on the genius of Proust?

[Anonymous No.19996126]

Narcissism, plain and simple; but it's not purely relegated to one generation or the other: it's human.

[Anonymous No.19996141]

>write what you know!
>NOOOOOOO NOT LIKE THAT

[Anonymous No.19996191]

>>19996124
Because Proust did not write about himself, about his "private little affairs".

[Anonymous No.19996331]

>>19995899
Based. Fuck autofiction.

[Anonymous No.19996362]

a film director said something with a similar sentiment, I wish I could remember it: I think it was Tarkovsky or perhaps Welles.

[Anonymous No.19996375]

>>19996038
say what you will about the quality of writing, but the lore of the Sexgore Empire is great!

[Anonymous No.19996391]

>>19996141
>WAHHHHH what do you mean i can't write a thesis about my homosexual tendencies and that i have to do research instead

[Anonymous No.19996397]

>>19995899
I feel attacked!

[Anonymous No.19996516]

>>19996391
I did do my research though

[Anonymous No.19996529]

>>19996141
I mean if what you know if retarded an degenerate, maybe you are better off shutting the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.19996577]

>>19996049
by scaling it up to other time-tried works of art.
It's what Eliot's tradition and the individual talent, basically.

[Anonymous No.19996579]

>>19996049the graphic is lifted from a shitty prageru video on art. Strange that it is getting paired with a Deleuze quote.

[Anonymous No.19996605]

>>19996579
Prageru is based. Right wingers are bros who just want to shill for oil companies and then leave normal people the fuck alone for the most part, while leftists shill for big pharma and the sex industry (notice how they are all enthusiatically for 'sex work' and porn all of a sudden) and the lgbt child molestation lobby. Dupes niggers and mentally ill sectors of the lumpenproletariat that are best looked at with contempt.

[Anonymous No.19996615]

>>19996038
those are in fact people dealing with their "personal affairs," except since nobody has a life anymore they just write about what it's like to play skyrim

[Anonymous No.19996621]

>>19995899
because it btfos their literary savior R C Waldun.

[Anonymous No.19996671]

>>19996038
Wrong. Just look at Rick and Morty. It could have been star trek for zoomers but it goes into gay shit like family problems and those 2 dumb bitches. Also Bojack.

[Anonymous No.19996688]

I see this shit a lot. My cousin wants to write a movie script and the whole theme is somehow going to be about going through his parents' divorce as a child.

[Anonymous No.19996694]

>>19996605
Everything you just stated has nothing to do with art. Politics aside, prageru has a horrible understanding of aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.19996695]

Holocaust writers BTFO

[Anonymous No.19996713]

>>19995907
You mean like 99% of people who ever lived?

[Anonymous No.19996718]

>>19996605
>(((Prageru))) is based
kys

[Anonymous No.19996723]

>>19996694
They are long hanging fruit relatively harmless next to the aesthetic horror that is the breadtube trannisphere.

[Anonymous No.19996737]

>>19996041
This is incorrect. Art was forced to retreat into the abstract in an attempt to escape the constant intellectual pressure to pin it down disect it and label the pieces at a fast enough rate as to approach a simulated death and static state of art. As life becomes indistinguishable from abstraction art is is given an opportunity to pivot to an offinsive position and make thrusts upon the intellect.

[Anonymous No.19996742]

>>19995899
>>19995976
pretty much this. Read what Nietzche has to say about pity. He actually calls pity one of the most dangerous things for the human race. We've arrived at a point in our history where our model of suffering is totally inseparable from our model of purpose and ""uniqueness."" Because everything is believed to rise out of the will to power and the exploitation of class, individuals only feel like they possess ""authenticity"" if they have a particular suffering indicative of being oppressed as a unique class. I hesitate to call it Marxism bc I'm unread in that direction but it seems to be something of that manner combined with a lack of critical thinking and low education standards.
What this all has to do with art is that this is the mindset which hates the canon. We are made to distrust institutions for the plain fact of their being institutions. DH Lawrence isn't read critically but is criticized in blanket moralizing statements: sexism is bad, racism is bad. But yeah no shit some white dude from 100 years ago doesnt match up with your standards. So to bring this all back, we promote people who aren't canonized. Great in theory (i guess) but is there a danger of not only discouraging people from reading objectively great writing but also of promoting those whose styles absolutely suffer from not reading objectively great writing? blah blah blah you get the idea.

[Anonymous No.19996787]

Can I get some context for this statement? Anyone have a link to the talk or something?

[Anonymous No.19996799]

>>19996737
Not the person who you are responding to but it isn’t like abstraction is a new thing in art. It’s been happening since the beginning in some forms. Your point is better than the other one on abstraction though.

[Anonymous No.19996815]

>>19996695

[Anonymous No.19996829]

>>19995899
I like it. Who is this?

[Anonymous No.19996843]

>>19996397
Stunning and brave.

[Anonymous No.19996857]

>>19995899
That graph reminds me of something...

[Anonymous No.19996914]

>>19996857
A difference of .004 can you put that in perspective?

[Anonymous No.19997030]

>>19995899
Few things are worse than dry "confessional" writings, especially in poetry. It's one of the most asinine things you can read in this day and age.
And ultimately, the value of art, to my understanding, comes down to effort and struggle. Where's the effort in detailing how your marriage fell apart when it's not tied with any other greater statement or purpose?
On a slightly unrelated note, man is it a pleasure to listen to deleuze's lectures.

[Anonymous No.19997081]

>>19995899
>PragerJew graph
>data source is literally "muh feelz"
>they place the beginning of decline roughly at the same time as the smug ivory tower faggots at the Paris Salon getting BTFO
Amerishart "conservatives" are a blight upon mankind

>>19996914
>vatnik can't into fractions
.004/.016 = 25%

[Anonymous No.19997091]

>>19996577
>It's what Eliot's tradition and the individual talent, basically.
In English doc?

[Anonymous No.19997207]

>>19997030
I dunno, I just read Brautigan's So the Wind Won't Blow it All Away and it was good. And I don't think I could separate that from a dry confessional

[Anonymous No.19997469]

>>19995899
How does one write characters if he finds himself unable to take inspiration from real life experiences then? Or does he mean that you should not sell your autobiography as novel?

[Anonymous No.19997538]

>>19995899
he's right though. just come up with a cool story and write it

[Anonymous No.19997548]

>>19995899
Autofiction BTFO

[Anonymous No.19997733]

b-b-b-b-b-b-b-but desu, my diary!

[Anonymous No.19997737]

>>19996671
It was hire women or get cancelled.

[Anonymous No.19997924]

>>19995899
Do keep in mind that this motherfucker also wrote a whole ass bookwork on Proust, the author par excellence when it comes to writing about particular personal memories. the difference between Proust and the boring-ass NYT bestsellers about having cancer is that Proust digs beneath the mundane surface and explores the structure of human consciousness and memory through his personal memories.

His point is not the point the dumbass PragerU's graph tries to make that all 'personal expression' is le bad. what Proust (and Deleuze as well) do is to find the profound within the personal, not to ban the personal altogether. This is also the whole point of Deleuze talking about the importance of creativity and expression as opposed to a monolithic truth in 'what is philosophy'

[Anonymous No.19997949]

>>19997924
Good post, anon. I actually bought Proust and Signs the other week, a few dozen pages in now.

[Anonymous No.19997957]

>reflecting on your experiences which can collectively be used to paint a better understanding of society is bad because academics cant jerk themselves off to it and psychoanalyze Iveta Lesbnovas love affair with Sir Faggotroon in part 2 chapter 5 of Niggercoons fifth novel which is widely considered his finest work because... uhm yeah just because

[Anonymous No.19998091]

>>19996914
1/4 of savings/earning power/purchasing power gone overnight. Stockmarket in Moscow is closed for a week (with inflation immanent now that oil companies are dumping the Russian energy sector partnerships; while the Russian economy is only being propped up from collapse by government mandate that these newly divested companies sell the majority of foreign revenue to Moscow just to prop up the rouble at home. This rupture from oil giants, usually complete corporate scum, probably signals that those revenues will be diminished with embargos on even gas from Russia upcoming. Not to mention, despite Moscow closing the stockmarket for a week, Moscow's stock exchange is still crashing--if it were investible some people would invest; it isn't). Might not matter to someone without employment still living at home being supported by parents who don't have a job that will be impacted--everything from Uber driver to oil company CEO will--, but it also matters especially to Russians down to the ability to feed themselves (which could go to shit since theyll have to export more wheat to China to offset these losses; hope it doesn't have that fungus or that's another major hit), but also affect the ability to wage wars. Switzerland, home of Nazi gold, wont even give Russians financial harbor. Yes, its sad that this is the power of capital, but way more awesome than another shitty half assed war fought by alcoholics. inb4 glowie. I care about money; Russia is a blackhole. Their interest rate spikes, stock market closures, abandonment by even the most unethical corporations, devalued currency are all plain facts from regulated globohomo organs in which Moscow gleefully participates... or used to.

[Anonymous No.19998113]

>>19995899
That graphic is so retarded
Tbh I may agree but I still like the boof of disquiet

[Anonymous No.19998143]

>>19996191
>Because Proust did not write about himself, about his "private little affairs".
About WHAT did he write then?

[Anonymous No.19998187]

>>19998143
It's about a fictional character named Marcel. Any likeness to real events or people are purely coincidental.

[Anonymous No.19998280]

>>19998187
This isnt so far off. Proust based it heavily on the memoirs of the Duc de Saint Simon, so many of the characters are almost 1:1 parallels of the inner circle at Versailles in the 17th-18th century

[Anonymous No.19998282]

>>19998187
I mean, how is his STYLE of writing any different from personal life-experience chatting?
(honest question)

[Anonymous No.19998295]

>>19998282
style of his dialogue or overall? His style of writing is overly-detailed (which I like) but certainly not the type of thing usually relegated to idle chatter, which if anything is marked by its fragmentary, laconic aspect. The chit chat in Proust is a sort of tightrope between neurotic emotional outbursts and one trying their best to be erudite and witty. I cant say how real things are in my own world, so I cant say how they were in those days. But Proust isn't a rambler, ironically, everything is planned to within an inch of its comprehensibility (in French at least, translations always have to make more sense.)

[Anonymous No.19998383]

There are two extremes:
a) Art is purely about technique
b) Art is purely about self-expression

Standing in either extreme is retarded. However, truly meaningful discussion about art will lie in the intersection between the two. There is a place for academic rigor and there is a place for subjectivity; art is not engineering. You also have to take into account that whatever is canonized by whatever institution you so praise is not done so without arbitrary bias.

[Anonymous No.19998427]

>>19997957
>50,000 new authors happen to have relatively the same experiences and write about them in the same exact way inadvertantly creating on average 50,000 of the same book every year and here's why thats good

[Anonymous No.19998428]

>>19998383
All this spectrum is retarded. The whole skill-expression axis is retarded. Art is to share a piece of your own human experience as a form of communication. It's not expression as usually defined by modernists, emotion, because expression of "emotions" is unintelligible and meaningless. You're simply activating those mirror neurons or hormones. Art doesn't want to be relatable to extort emotions out of a viewer, it wants to add instead to that person. I can't type this much but I brought up a medieval diary the other day to read a piece about famine to someone, and in that passage there was a memory left by a man, not just a description of events but his personal journey through that event. I do not mean that art should be historical nonfiction, but it should have the same intent. This is art that is valuable. Today you see this art but you cannot see the people behind it, at the very best only the pomo irony that is specifically designed to disintegrate everything human.

[Anonymous No.19998432]

>>19998091
Did Russia not forsee something like this happening? Having plans in place to ease such economic tensions? What did they forsee happening?

[Anonymous No.19998433]

>>19995899
I don't? I write ideas.

[Anonymous No.19998460]

>>19998432
"Russia" exists so that Jews can make money by selling Siberia's oil and gas reserves while enacting ethnosadistic fantasies upon Slavs. The people who politicians care about can just pack up and leave on private jets when things get too bad. This is how Russia has worked since Christianity was introduced bringing the Slavs out of ethnic tribalism, the Jews have just replaced the Boyars.

[Anonymous No.19998493]

>>19996742
where can i read about this?

[Anonymous No.19998532]

>>19995899
Because Millennials are retarded

[Anonymous No.19998723]

>>19998432
They simply thought, by moving the assets of the richest Russians out of the country, they would protect themselves at the highest level because, they assumed, Europe would be unwilling or unable to check them, even or especially over protracted periods of time. There was no precedent for sanctions this severe this quickly... (Galvanised by the joint civil and corporate activism engendered, ironically, by all those 'internal tensions' Russia thought was destroying the west rather than galvanising their logistics. Coupled with the fact that Russia's army is a fucking joke beyond the propoganda.) Really, if pic related is really you're expedition force? Holy shit.

Turns out all the rich people just want to be rich Europeans whether they call the selves Russian or whatever, as apparently do the average people surprisingly. That is what happens when there is suppressed inner tension to limiting self-reflection within a nation state. This makes Iraq look like the Battle of Canae.

[Anonymous No.19998769]

>>19996038
I liked the first three Sexgore books but after Ragthok defeated the Succubus Queen and turned her into his sex slave the books got kinda boring.

[Anonymous No.19998776]

>>19995899
Firstly, PragerU is a pathetically hilarious, ideologically driven propaganda machine that is the literal antithesis of art.
Secondly, that quote is a banal platitude that you cannot take seriously. It’s just someone stating their opinion of what subject matter they like in a novel. You cannot take it seriously.
Thirdly, what the fuck is autofiction? I guarantee no one can give a proper definition.
What an awful, stupid thread.

[Anonymous No.19998783]

>>19996577
Sorry, it's what Eliot's 'Tradition and the Individual Talent' talks about, basically. This is what canon does and how it is shaped. You can find something similar in M. Arnold as well. He uses a phrase when referring to other time-tried works of art which you can use as units of measurement, I cannot recall it now.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/69400/tradition-and-the-individual-talent

[Anonymous No.19998785]

>>19997091
>>19998783

[Anonymous No.19998942]

>>19998783
Yet if the only form of tradition, of handing down, consisted in following the ways of the immediate generation before us in a blind or timid adherence to its successes, “tradition” should positively be discouraged. We have seen many such simple currents soon lost in the sand; and novelty is better than repetition. Tradition is a matter of much wider significance. It cannot be inherited, and if you want it you must obtain it by great labour. It involves, in the first place, the historical sense, which we may call nearly indispensable to any one who would continue to be a poet beyond his twenty-fifth year; and the historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence; the historical sense compels a man to write not merely with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional. And it is at the same time what makes a writer most acutely conscious of his place in time, of his own contemporaneity.

.

[Anonymous No.19998946]

>>19998783
>>19998942
""No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. You cannot value him alone; you must set him, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. I mean this as a principle of aesthetic, not merely historical, criticism. The necessity that he shall conform, that he shall cohere, is not onesided; what happens when a new work of art is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the works of art which preceded it. The existing monuments form an ideal order among themselves, which is modified by the introduction of the new (the really new) work of art among them. The existing order is complete before the new work arrives; for order to persist after the supervention of novelty, the whole existing order must be, if ever so slightly, altered; and so the relations, proportions, values of each work of art toward the whole are readjusted; and this is conformity between the old and the new. Whoever has approved this idea of order, of the form of European, of English literature will not find it preposterous that the past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past. And the poet who is aware of this will be aware of great difficulties and responsibilities.

In a peculiar sense he will be aware also that he must inevitably be judged by the standards of the past. I say judged, not amputated, by them; not judged to be as good as, or worse or better than, the dead; and certainly not judged by the canons of dead critics. It is a judgment, a comparison, in which two things are measured by each other. To conform merely would be for the new work not really to conform at all; it would not be new, and would therefore not be a work of art. And we do not quite say that the new is more valuable because it fits in; but its fitting in is a test of its value—a test, it is true, which can only be slowly and cautiously applied, for we are none of us infallible judges of conformity""

[Anonymous No.20000495]

>>19998942
>>19998946
This is ts Eliot quote from that

[Anonymous No.20000562]

>>19995899
They do? Who cares? Standards declined when standards were introduced. I pin it all on the disaster that was the Renaissance. It's all been downhill since then, and the main culprit is the adulation of the "artist". Artists are cerebral prostitutes, nothing more and nothing less. A good artist is just a good craftsman who makes pretty things. The moment artists were given status higher than that of a common whore, everything went to shit. A whore should just STFU and suck cock well. Whores are in no position to pontificate about anything, especially aesthetics.

So yeah, fuck the Renaissance, the Renaissance man, the "liberal arts" and every single needlessly glorified masturbatory activity. Artists are whores and they should be reminded of that fact constantly. The loser in the OP pic simply hates the fact that the common man has caught up and knows what's up: all art is masturbation.

[Anonymous No.20000574]

>>19995899
The picture above has absolutely nothing to do with what he's saying

[Anonymous No.20000585]

>>19996141
Write what you know is just a sound advice, it's not gospel.
But writing what you know or don't know is only a small part of making something literature.

[Anonymous No.20000588]

>>19998493
Nietzsche, Baudrillard, Virilio etc

[Anonymous No.20000612]

>>19995899
That meme graph doesn't actually have any relationship with what he's saying.

[Anonymous No.20000672]

>>19998532
I can literally draw better than this with only childhood art eduction, which isn't hard ofc. But I've honestly been thinking of getting some proper training and education in and making it my profession.

[Anonymous No.20000676]

>>19998942
>>19998946
""In English writing we seldom speak of tradition, though we occasionally apply its name in deploring its absence. We cannot refer to “the tradition” or to “a tradition”; at most, we employ the adjective in saying that the poetry of So-and-so is “traditional” or even “too traditional.” Seldom, perhaps, does the word appear except in a phrase of censure. If otherwise, it is vaguely approbative, with the implication, as to the work approved, of some pleasing archaeological reconstruction. You can hardly make the word agreeable to English ears without this comfortable reference to the reassuring science of archaeology.

Certainly the word is not likely to appear in our appreciations of living or dead writers. Every nation, every race, has not only its own creative, but its own critical turn of mind; and is even more oblivious of the shortcomings and limitations of its critical habits than of those of its creative genius. We know, or think we know, from the enormous mass of critical writing that has appeared in the French language the critical method or habit of the French; we only conclude (we are such unconscious people) that the French are “more critical” than we, and sometimes even plume ourselves a little with the fact, as if the French were the less spontaneous. Perhaps they are; but we might remind ourselves that criticism is as inevitable as breathing, and that we should be none the worse for articulating what passes in our minds when we read a book and feel an emotion about it, for criticizing our own minds in their work of criticism. One of the facts that might come to light in this process is our tendency to insist, when we praise a poet, upon those aspects of his work in which he least resembles any one else. In these aspects or parts of his work we pretend to find what is individual, what is the peculiar essence of the man. We dwell with satisfaction upon the poet’s difference from his predecessors, especially his immediate predecessors; we endeavour to find something that can be isolated in order to be enjoyed. Whereas if we approach a poet without this prejudice we shall often find that not only the best, but the most individual parts of his work may be those in which the dead poets, his ancestors, assert their immortality most vigorously. And I do not mean the impressionable period of adolescence, but the period of full maturity.""

[Anonymous No.20000680]

>>19998946
>>19998942
>>20000676
""
Yet if the only form of tradition, of handing down, consisted in following the ways of the immediate generation before us in a blind or timid adherence to its successes, “tradition” should positively be discouraged. We have seen many such simple currents soon lost in the sand; and novelty is better than repetition. Tradition is a matter of much wider significance. It cannot be inherited, and if you want it you must obtain it by great labour. It involves, in the first place, the historical sense, which we may call nearly indispensable to any one who would continue to be a poet beyond his twenty-fifth year; and the historical sense involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its presence; the historical sense compels a man to write not merely with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. This historical sense, which is a sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal together, is what makes a writer traditional. And it is at the same time what makes a writer most acutely conscious of his place in time, of his own contemporaneity.

No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. You cannot value him alone; you must set him, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. I mean this as a principle of aesthetic, not merely historical, criticism. The necessity that he shall conform, that he shall cohere, is not onesided; what happens when a new work of art is created is something that happens simultaneously to all the works of art which preceded it."""

[Anonymous No.20000704]

>>19998942
>>20000676
If you compare several representative passages of the greatest poetry you see how great is the variety of types of combination, and also how completely any semi-ethical criterion of “sublimity” misses the mark. For it is not the “greatness,” the intensity, of the emotions, the components, but the intensity of the artistic process, the pressure, so to speak, under which the fusion takes place, that counts. The episode of Paolo and Francesca employs a definite emotion, but the intensity of the poetry is something quite different from whatever intensity in the supposed experience it may give the impression of. It is no more intense, furthermore, than Canto XXVI, the voyage of Ulysses, which has not the direct dependence upon an emotion. Great variety is possible in the process of transmutation of emotion: the murder of Agamemnon, or the agony of Othello, gives an artistic effect apparently closer to a possible original than the scenes from Dante. In the Agamemnon, the artistic emotion approximates to the emotion of an actual spectator; in Othello to the emotion of the protagonist himself. But the difference between art and the event is always absolute; the combination which is the murder of Agamemnon is probably as complex as that which is the voyage of Ulysses. In either case there has been a fusion of elements. The ode of Keats contains a number of feelings which have nothing particular to do with the nightingale, but which the nightingale, partly, perhaps, because of its attractive name, and partly because of its reputation, served to bring together.

The point of view which I am struggling to attack is perhaps related to the metaphysical theory of the substantial unity of the soul: for my meaning is, that the poet has, not a “personality” to express, but a particular medium, which is only a medium and not a personality, in which impressions and experiences combine in peculiar and unexpected ways. Impressions and experiences which are important for the man may take no place in the poetry, and those which become important in the poetry may play quite a negligible part in the man, the personality.

I will quote a passage which is unfamiliar enough to be regarded with fresh attention in the light—or darkness—of these observations:

And now methinks I could e’en chide myself
For doating on her beauty, though her death
Shall be revenged after no common action.
Does the silkworm expend her yellow labours
For thee? For thee does she undo herself?
Are lordships sold to maintain ladyships
For the poor benefit of a bewildering minute?
Why does yon fellow falsify highways,
And put his life between the judge’s lips,
To refine such a thing—keeps horse and men
To beat their valours for her? . . .

[Anonymous No.20000709]

>>20000676
>>20000704
""In this passage (as is evident if it is taken in its context) there is a combination of positive and negative emotions: an intensely strong attraction toward beauty and an equally intense fascination by the ugliness which is contrasted with it and which destroys it. This balance of contrasted emotion is in the dramatic situation to which the speech is pertinent, but that situation alone is inadequate to it. This is, so to speak, the structural emotion, provided by the drama. But the whole effect, the dominant tone, is due to the fact that a number of floating feelings, having an affinity to this emotion by no means superficially evident, have combined with it to give us a new art emotion.

It is not in his personal emotions, the emotions provoked by particular events in his life, that the poet is in any way remarkable or interesting. His particular emotions may be simple, or crude, or flat. The emotion in his poetry will be a very complex thing, but not with the complexity of the emotions of people who have very complex or unusual emotions in life. One error, in fact, of eccentricity in poetry is to seek for new human emotions to express; and in this search for novelty in the wrong place it discovers the perverse. The business of the poet is not to find new emotions, but to use the ordinary ones and, in working them up into poetry, to express feelings which are not in actual emotions at all. And emotions which he has never experienced will serve his turn as well as those familiar to him.""

[Anonymous No.20000752]

>>20000709
>>20000704
Sounds like a hack

[Anonymous No.20000780]

>>19995904
It does, but you still need craft

[Anonymous No.20000870]

>>19995899
because he's objectively wrong, if you were to actually read, you'd realise every artwork is an autobiography, even the non-fiction pieces.

[Anonymous No.20000885]

>>20000562
and yet you post on an art board, knee deep in the whores yourself,
artists are just philosophers in different mediums

[Anonymous No.20000901]

millenoids are fluoride'd. papi D. saying they aphantasia

[Anonymous No.20000907]

>>19995899
You would rather hate the new stuff than enjoy the oldies. It's much more addictive and cheap. Projection

[Anonymous No.20000923]

>>20000870
if you were to actually read (the fucking quote you're responding to) you'd realize he's not talking about people writing to make sense of their life in some abstract sense but about book-long narcissist personal anecdotes. also kys yourself for thinking in banalities like "from a certain point of view, isn't every book an autobiography." isn't every story, like, a love story??? if you think about it???

[Anonymous No.20001019]

>>20000870
based can't read-bro

[Anonymous No.20001428]

>>20000752
Never mind, I think I get it now

[Anonymous No.20001445]

>>19998942
>>19998946
Is it just me or is this a bit profound?

[Anonymous No.20001507]

>>19995899
That man is absolutely right. That reminds me of this article:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/exmpa7/i-spent-two-years-writing-a-book-that-nobody-read
That one is about an imbecile that is unfit for life yet thinks he deserves to be a million dollar autor because he writes about himself. He even states somewhere in this sorry excuse of an article how he believes that all authors just want to write about themselves and thats the only use for writing. If someone Plebbit tier guy thinks his life is worth writing about he is just delusional.

But I can see, why the guy in OP's pic could be detested, since most of todays generation is exactly the kind of plebbit tier loosers that holds itself in such high regard that they think people would love to read about their boring useless lives.

[Anonymous No.20001538]

>>19996049
You can't. It is just impossible to find a definition that fits for everything. Thats why people started to go with "everything is art.". That was supposed to open the gate that everything Could be art, like cubism, expressionism and so on while many things still are not, like a banana taped to a wall. But the modern movements twisted that into "Everything is art, so my garbage ist art." and started brainwashing people that taping a banana on a wall is art. And that is just plain wrong. Everything CAN be art, but not everything IS art. People can feel what is and what is not. But we have a high society of artists that lives in their own bubble sniffing their own farts.

[Anonymous No.20001690]

>PragerU
Id rather have blacked porn in the 'log

[Anonymous No.20001698]

>>19996742
Recommended me some good /lit/ about this topic

[Anonymous No.20001702]

>>20001690
Why?

[Anonymous No.20001705]

>>19995899
The arts need to be dumbed down so women of color can participate

[Anonymous No.20001754]

>>20001702
I can at least see some titties

[Anonymous No.20001792]

>>20001754
Ok, I can understand that.Titties are great. But why must it be specificly blacked?

[Anonymous No.20001812]

>>20001792
4chan is a blacked affiliate

[Anonymous No.20001832]

>>20001812
I thought 4chan is a candyass affiliate.

[Anonymous No.20001901]

Prayer U is cancer

Deleuze is a French charlatan

[Anonymous No.20002459]

>>19996119
born in 1996 yeah i used facebook up until high school, then everyone stopped using is. I didnt even know what instagram was.

[Anonymous No.20003595]

>>20001792
Are you autistic? He invoked blacked to emphasize how much he dislikes prageru.

[Anonymous No.20003821]

>>19996049
You don't, objectively. But most of us agree a fresh cookie is better than a burnt one.

[Anonymous No.20003889]

>>19995899
Because liberal-minded people hate being told that they should be ashamed of expressing themselves in certain ways (or expressing themselves at all, as the above chart seems to imply) and see condemnations of this sort as Marxist or an attack on the freedom of expression because everyone has the right to express themselves however they want, and all that.
I've started reading some of E. B. White's nonfiction writings about his "private little affairs" and I've enjoyed them so far. I like his elegant prose when he's talking about mundane stuff like moving his belongings out of his apartment, and the witty but reflective tone when he's talking about the death of his pig. I've also been reading Pat Conroy's fiction, which unashamedly mirrors his personal life, but I really appreciate the wide range of words he uses to express the protagonists' inner turmoil and their conflict with their environment.
So I don't see why anyone should be ashamed of expressing their personal affairs in writing, whether in the form of reflective nonfiction or dramatic fiction, because some writers can write about their affairs in a way that will make them relevant to life as a whole, and that can help create order out of chaos, which is usually why people read and write that stuff to begin with.

[Anonymous No.20003932]

>>19996737
i thought it was just because formalism demanded a diminishing role for content

[Anonymous No.20003942]

It's incredible watching art turn into tr-c-ash cans and it's being called progress? aesthetically, there's nothing worse than morality.

[Anonymous No.20003962]

>>19998091
does anyone know what putin is thinking? other than a smash and grab into the "pantheon" of warrior rulers.

[Anonymous No.20004018]

A good book is in general from the authors POV:
1/3 made up
1/3 read
1/3 experienced2GWMS

[Anonymous No.20004471]

Midwit take

[Anonymous No.20004491]

>>20001832
4chañ is a total sloot. affiliates with any/everything possible.

[Anonymous No.20004606]

>>19998532
These don't even have soul

[Anonymous No.20004693]

>>19996829
Gilles Deleuze