[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 27 KB, 357x479, greatbodygirl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012114 No.2012114 [Reply] [Original]

Thomas Pynchon (80s)
Paul Auster (70s, I think)
Margaret Atwood (70s)

Makes me feel kinda sad, knowing another generation of great writers will die soon. A lot of them I haven't read their entire body of work though, so there's that.

>> No.2012122

They will respawn as a new generation of writers and produce something worth reading when you're old.

>> No.2012125

terry pratchet

>> No.2012129

>Thomas Pynchon
>post modernism
Nothing but leftist trash. No sane honorable person would read his garbage works.

>Paul Auster
A jew

>Margaret Atwood
a woman

so, NOPE.

>> No.2012133

I am not in my 80s, I'm seventy-four fucking years old. When you feel like reckoning the lifespan of the American Recluse, remember when Salinger was my age he had another sixteen years to go.

>> No.2012137

>>2012133
oh boy he's going senile

>> No.2012140

>>2012137

No I'm not. It's 8:53 in the fucking morning here on the Upper West Side, and I've been proofreading The Japanese Insurance Adjuster all night. You should be so senile.

>> No.2012143

>>2012140
looks like someone is a bit grumpy. don't worry, the nurse will bring your breakfast in a minute

>> No.2012154

>>2012129
What

>> No.2012158

Thomas Pynchon posts here xD.

>> No.2012164
File: 7 KB, 220x195, 220px-Christopher_Hitchens_crop.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012164

>> No.2012168

I think Philip Roth is still alive.

in b4 jew

>> No.2012169

>>2012164

The prayers of the faithful have already kept him alive past all scientific expectations for stage 4 esophogeal cancer.

>> No.2012178

>>2012169
More likely it was superior american health care.

>> No.2012180

>>2012178
eheh eheh ehehehe ehehehehhehehehehehehehehe

>> No.2012182

Chomsky isn't long for this world. When he passes, the Left will be in even deeper shit than it has already gotten itself into.

>> No.2012187

>>2012182
luckily everything will be ok again in episode VI

>> No.2012188

Harold Bloom. :(

>> No.2012191

>>2012187
You mean after we throw the ring back into Mt. Doom?

>> No.2012199

>>2012129
>Pynchon
>political
news to me

where'd you get that from

>> No.2012204

Robert Coover, 79
Don DeLillo, 75, I don't know I hear he has a good exercise program and diet and is healthy as fuck.
William Gass, 86, high-risk, obese
Doris Lessing, 92
>>2012168
Philip Roth, 78
Gore Vidal, 86

>> No.2012205

>>2012199
When a leftist writes a novel, their politics are implicit in the entire thing.
Pretty sure i remember trying to read gravity's rainbow and putting it down due to leftist slant.

>> No.2012206
File: 140 KB, 750x609, 1311673840973.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012206

>>2012199
Vineland is a pretty direct source. Don't be fooled by some of the gags, it's acerbic.

>> No.2012211

Kenzaburo Oe, probably. He's 76 right now.

>> No.2012212

>>2012199
I'm pretty sure everything that isn't immediately recognizable as American Conservative is considered leftist

>> No.2012214

>>2012205
The same rational implies that all written works are politically slanted. And undermines the severity of your point

>> No.2012216

>>2012212
When the book starts lecturing on "racism" and how evil nazi germany was, you know it's LEFTIST.

>> No.2012218

Umberto Eco, because his beard is going to a pull a sort of Burroughs 'talking asshole' return on him

>> No.2012222
File: 193 KB, 500x592, 1309580264517.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012222

>>2012214
Well I wasn't OP; just chiming in. I don't know how big a point it is really. I would say just Pynchon is more political than other writers in a more direct way.

All that aside I don't care for his work really.

>> No.2012227

ALL THE GREAT AUTHORS HAVE LONG BEEN DEAD.

WHEN WILL YOU REALISE THIS?

>> No.2012230

>>2012222

Yeah, well fuck you too, buddy. I don't care for your work.

>> No.2012233

>>2012214
Yes, everything is politically slanted, either implicitly or explicitly.

And so naturally, liberals prefer reading books which support their leftoid views.

You can see this present in a lot of "modern" fantasy novels. At least IRL the liberal presents the claim that race doesn't exist to support their "discrimination is unjust" views.
But in fantasy, you have obvious and blatant differences and tendencies and so on between races, and yet still they say prejudice and discrimination are bad things?

>> No.2012234

Thomas Pynchon is one of the greatest writers of the 20th century. You should all suck his dick, regardless of its age.

>> No.2012238
File: 228 KB, 1099x1232, 4113 - (9) 9 baka cirno cosplay haters_gonna_hate kill_yourself otaku the_strongest touhou ⑨.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012238

>>2012230
Okay.

>>2012233
Okay.

>> No.2012239

>>2012233

>But in fantasy, you have obvious and blatant differences and tendencies and so on between races, and yet still they say prejudice and discrimination are bad things?

Between races, or between species?

>> No.2012242

>>2012239
Orcs, elves, humans, gnomes, and so on are races, since they usually include half breed mongrels all over the place.

>> No.2012254

>>2012233
You are being silly... you throw out the topic of discrimination. Expecting it to be taken explicitly on original definition, when common consensus takes the definition to a negative extreme. DON'T DO THIS YOU WILL BECOME A FOOL.

Yes discrimination is good, when you want to spot a revenous lion or a fire truck with its lights on.

But discrimination is bad. If you want a white, boo hoo, discrimination story you don't need to look further than South Africa. Where the ANC made it mandetory for there to be black people at every tier of a company (some percentage). It is bad for them now because they are forced to train unskilled people (in most cases, NOT ALL). But the country will benefit in the long term.

Perjudice and discrimination are BAD by COMMON DEFINITION. Just because you like the image of yourself in the mirror, does not give justification to think other people are lesser because they look different.

>> No.2012251
File: 87 KB, 469x428, Trollface.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012251

>>2012242
WHAT ABOUT THE MOST GLORIOUS OF ALL, THE TROLLS?

>> No.2012260

>>2012242

Some species can interbreed. See: Horses and Zebra, every sub-species of the domestic dog (and wolves).

>> No.2012270

>>2012260
horses and zebras are the same species.

>every sub-species of the domestic dog (and wolves).
They are the same species... which is why its different subspecies(races/breeds)

>> No.2012276

>>2012270

>horses and zebras are the same species.

No they aren't. One is Equus zebra, while the other is Equus ferus. Same genus, but not the same species.

>They are the same species... which is why its different subspecies(races/breeds)

Race is not a synonym for subspecies.

>> No.2012295

>>2012276
>Race is not a synonym for subspecies.
yes it is.

>> No.2012298

>>2012295
Nuh-uh.

>> No.2012310

>>2012298
uh-huh it is.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Race
>A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.

>> No.2012315

>>2012310

lol, did you just fail to read:

> that has been given formal taxonomic recognition

Or are you really silly enough to post a quote that contradicts your own point?

>> No.2012325

>>2012315
It is merely different names. They like to shy away from the word "race" because it doesn't fit with PC tendencies.

>> No.2012769

>>2012205
We'll still have David Harvey.
>>2012182
>Implying that this isn't also true of right wing authors.

>> No.2012778

CTRL+F
LOL NO ONE SAID GRRM, what was discussed in this thread?!

>> No.2012784

>>2012778
try reading it and finding out?

Long story short, you should not read books by liberals, jews, and women.

>> No.2012783

>>2012233
You're conflating difference with value judgments.
Different does not mean better or worse, it means better or worse at this, better or worse at that, better or worse at the other, etc.
To add to this point, the other inherent problem with prejudice and discrimination, at least IRL, is that it's based in inaccurate stereotypes supported through logical fallacies and distortions of statistical data for presupposed conclusions rather than facts.

>> No.2012790

>>2012783
Also the human genome project has shown considerable evidence that the differences between races genetically are incredibly minute and even rare as genetic combinations.
But you'll disregard this conclusion founded in hard science and throw up some troll bullshit about sports or crime or something.

>> No.2012801

>>2012790
It hasn't shown that at all you liar. Take your politically motivated pseudo-science somewhere else.

The very concept of "nation" is based on homogenous peoples living in a country.
You show you don't understand reality when you babble about "prejudice and discrimination" as if love of your own implies hatred of others.

And plain statistical data on violence and crime and intelligence is IMPOSSIBLE to be distorted. Which is why leftist trash like yourself tell us to dismiss it all because it doesn't support your secular religion.

>> No.2012806

Cormac McCarthy is 78. He is working on 3 new novels.. wonder if he will make it.

>> No.2012810

>>2012114
Paul Auster sucks. I hope he dies soon. Anyone who says Auster is a great writer is completely clueless.

>> No.2012817

>>2012801
>... at all you liar
http://amjca.blogspot.com/2009/04/human-genome-project-confirms-that-race.html
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng2150.html
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/human-genome-project-announces-race-does-not-exist

>And plain statistical data... is IMPOSSIBLE to be distorted.
That is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen posted here. How statistical data can be distorted or misrepresented is something sociology students are given as a softball essay assignment.

>> No.2012818

>>2012129
You hate Pynchon for being political (even though he's not) AND you're a sexist anti-Semite? Do you expect people to take you seriously in real life?

>> No.2012823

>>2012204
Gore Vidal is 85.

>> No.2012825

>>2012818
He's definitely just a troll, but I feel kind of honor-bound to argue this with him anyhow. You never know who's reading, and I hate this kind of feeble-minded bullshit. I know he's not going to read any of those links I posted. The first one is clearly biased, the second one is objective, and the third has some bias as well; he'll latch onto the first and third and ignore the second one that uses the numbers he espouses so much faith in per his other post.
He's going to be adamant about the immutability of statistical analysis (which has been ANALYZED, meaning by a PERSON, which means the possibility of BIAS) but when raw data is handed to him instead, he'll pick a card from his magic deck rather than stick to one we both agree is fair. Such is the intellectual sleight-of-hand required to continue a racist ideology.

>> No.2012832

>>2012817
Try using something other then a strawman argument.

Hint: You should try supporting your own assertions.
Just because they claim "race doesn't exist" Which is fake claim anyways based on misinterpretation of results, doesn't automatically mean that there is not significant differences between different subspecies of human.

>> No.2012840

>>2012832
Subspecies is irrelevant to race. Humans are humans. Just throwing that out there.

>> No.2012844

>>2012840
This is your opinion, and it's blatantly wrong as is obvious in thousands of years of history and tradition.

>> No.2012847

>>2012825
I also find it funny that you made this wall of adhominem text while calling me a troll.

>> No.2012848

>>2012847
ad hominem guy strikes again

>> No.2012849

>>2012844
So then what are the latin names for all the different "subspecies" of humans if every race is a subspecies? I'm sure an actual biologist would have subspecies names for everyone if it were true.

>> No.2012850

>that there is not significant differences between different subspecies of human.
Define significant. Genetics says the differences are not significant.

>> No.2012857

>>2012850
We can see with OUR OWN EYES that the differences are significant.
Different bone structure, different skull structure, OBVIOUSLY different intelligence and personality tendencies.
According to your sorts, the differences in genetics between a human and a horse would be "insignificant" as well.

Further the fact whites have built a grand civilization and the non-whites built basically nothing proves for itself the bullshit of the claim of "insignificant differences".

>> No.2012858

Self-identified race can be identified with 99.9% accuracy from DNA clusters.

http://med.stanford.edu/tanglab/publications/PDFs/GeneticStructureSelfIdentifiedRaceEthnicityAndConf
oundingInCase-ControlAssociationStudies.pdf

That doesn't mean that every member of a race has to have any particular characteristic, obviously. Not all Mongoloids retain their epicanthic folds, and not all blacks have below average IQ.

(my first post in this thread)

>> No.2012860
File: 36 KB, 280x289, iobqtirt..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2012860

>>2012858
>>2012114

>> No.2012863

>>2012847
You do realize that:
A) ad hominem means a specific kind of argument which negates the opposing argument through attacking their character, it doesn't mean name-calling, and
B) that ad hominem is a logical argument when the person's character is of clear relevance to the logical proposition they are asserting,
right?

>arguing with a creationist
>"Well, of course you won't agree with an evolutionary biologist if I offered one as evidence, you're a creationist and you say you don't believe in evolution."
This is an ad hominem argument. And it's perfectly sound, logically speaking.

>> No.2012865

>>2012863
>ad hominem is a logical argument
I guess that's why they call em tripfags!

>> No.2012867

>>2012860
This type of idealism makes me sick

>> No.2012875

>>2012863
I'm on your side, but ad hominem is faulty arguing if you don't back it up (or if the person you're arguing with don't back it up himself; no worries here though, he certainly has).

>>2012865
It is logical if the person it is being used against is still ignorant even after it has been pointed out. One can assume he's not going to listen to anything, so there's no reason to continue providing facts.

>> No.2012874

>>2012857
You do realize that if you examine what our own eyes can see and what is genetically determined, one of these is much more accurate than the other, right?
I'll give you a hint: our eyes are not accurate, and they're hooked up to these things called brains which don't work perfectly either.

>>2012858
They've mapped the genome, of course they can identify race. My entire point is that YES, DIFFERENCES DO EXIST, but they are INSIGNIFICANT. If they couldn't identify race through the genome, how the hell would they be able to say that the differences are negligible?

>> No.2012876

>>2012865
Look it up, jack-ass. Ad hominem is not fallacious when the person's character is of direct relevance to their stance.

>> No.2012880

>>2012876
I'd also like to add that if ad hominem were never logical, and always fallacious, then a claim of hypocrisy would never have any place in any debate.

>> No.2012883

Ad hominem guy and trisomy guy should have gay sex together.

>> No.2012890

>>2012883
Leave trisomy guy out of this, I like him.

>> No.2012901

http://www.whitakeronline.org/marchofthetitans/hla_alleles.htm

>> No.2012909

HLA ALLELES ARE RACE SPECIFIC
It is not "genes" which are race specific, but groups of them and frequencies.

You suggest that the differences are "insignificant" which is a value judgement, but if the differences between races are insignificant, then so are the differences between humans and neanderthals, or humans and monkeys/apes. Since the differences are either less then between whites/negros, or not much more.

>> No.2012914

>>2012874
> My entire point is that YES, DIFFERENCES DO EXIST, but they are INSIGNIFICANT.

What do you mean by "insignificant"? Even relatively small genetic differences can have enormous consequences.

>> No.2012918

>>2012901
That's the best you could do? Some medical facts people have known about for over a century now, that different races have different susceptibilities to different illnesses and genetic predispositions, and then some other bullshit about the caste system in India?
Yes, races are different. I've already said that. At least twice now, maybe three times?
The differences are not significant. You have yet to qualify (or perhaps I should say quantify?) what significant is. The best you've done there is bring up what the eyes see, and I already pointed out why that's not an accurate source in light of scientific study.

>> No.2012920

>>2012914
Insignificant in relation to his earlier point about species and subspecies. The difference genetically between a black man and a white man is far smaller than the difference between subspecies of animals. Read the links I posted, they already cover all of this.

>> No.2012931

I'm done with this argument, I only have a layperson's knowledge about any of it, take it to fucking /sci/ and let this thread die.

>> No.2012937

>>2012920
http://www.goodrumj.com/RFaqHTML.html

This article suggests that humans have moderate to great genetic differentiation

In fact it suggests that contrary to your claim, humans have more genetic differentiation then the domestic dog.

>> No.2012996

>>2012937
I'll take my lumps there, he says that races can be identified, but he also points out something in his conclusion:
>the visible variation between races greatly exaggerates overall genetic differences.

And I'll finish up with saying this still provides absolutely no reason to suppose any sort of judgment about one race being inferior or superior.
This is why I'm done with this argument. It is pointless to continue this discussion. There is no genetic evidence to support racism, and none has been provided, only genetic evidence that races exist.

>> No.2013003
File: 25 KB, 460x276, hitchens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2013003

Goddamnit, Hitch.

We need you now more than ever.

>> No.2013509

Hopefully Adrienne Rich. She's in her 80s.

>> No.2013520

At least Sunhawk has good taste in fit girls.

>> No.2013528
File: 25 KB, 526x350, 543534525235.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2013528

I just read this thread and thought about replying with an opinion, but then I realized I'm white. LOL.

>> No.2013533

Noam Chomsky

He's 82 years old. Maybe he'll end up like Bertrand Russell and live for another decade.

>> No.2013595

It'll probably be the last person you expect. Some young(ish) writer will do a DFW.

>> No.2013637

I hate to even type this, because he is my favorite author. But I fear Gabriel Garcia Marquez is not much longer for the world. He's 84.

>> No.2013742

>>2013595
Someone in one of James Franco's creative writing classes will kill themselves when they're working at Pret A Manger and he sells 2 Palo 2 Alto for six figures. Their 300-page suicide note blaming him will go viral and inspire an episode of Law and Order, their novel will be published posthumously and do a Confederacy of Dunces, and they'll be the Voice Of Our Generation