[ 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: 350 KB, 1678x1678, GettyImages-3230844-88e43d27551448729bae517f578e169a.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21007941 No.21007941 [Reply] [Original]

How important is English literature within literature? In my weighing on the canon, the most important writers used English, a full third of the canon, including Shakespeare and Eliot, the most important psychological and modern poetry writers.

>> No.21007968

>>21007941
English for literature
Russian for science
Spanish for religion

>> No.21007997

>>21007968
>Russian for science
Are you serious? England literally invented science and was the birthplace of the industrial revolution. Russia is a fucking backwater. Your post makes zero sense.

>> No.21008003

>>21007941
>a full third of the canon
If you overrate them, sure. Harold Bloom put a million literally who poets in the 20th c. bit of his big list.

>> No.21008039

>>21007941
Within the western canon, usually heavily overrated by anglos. It only became relevant for the rest of the European continent in the 19th century; since then it's one of the central literary cultures (together with France and Russia, followed by Germany). But "a third of the canon" is ridiculous.

>>21008003
Yeah, Bloom's selection is absurdly anglocentric. Samuel Johnson gets a chapter, but Dostoyevsky doesn't.

>> No.21008042

>>21007997
france was historically more important for science.

>>21008003
well yeah thats my perception, but i like the positive spirit of the english poets more than the french equivalents.

>> No.21008050

>>21008042
i acknowledge that russia italy and spain peak higher for their novels and epic poems

>> No.21008066

>>21007968
>Russian for science
They had literally no science until 18th century when they had to get rid of the Germans who utterly dominated their universities.

>>21008050
>russia italy and spain peak higher for their novels and epic poems
Which epic poems?

>> No.21008088

>>21007997
>England literally invented science

>who's Galileo Galilei
>who's Leonardo Bruni
>what is the Renaissance

See?, there's no wonder if everyone hates anglos. You are full of yourselves for everything.

>> No.21008094

I don't hate anglos. Considering nobody reads English literature is underrated

>> No.21008635

If you mean only actual Britishers yes, but if you include Americans then no. American literature over the last 100 years utterly mogs every other country.
As you'd expect given the population and economy

>> No.21008652

>>21008635
>American literature over the last 100 years utterly mogs every other country.
I kneel, American. Please don't kill me :(

>> No.21008669

>>21008635
>American literature over the last 100 years utterly mogs every other country.
op here. jesus christ, no. joyce and eliot (whos really european) and the other england adjacents, proust and other french, each outweigh the best of america by far

>> No.21008935

>>21008669
Dude, can you actually name some niggas from the last 100 years? That is, since 1922? And set them against US literature in that period?
Check out when Proust died ffs

>> No.21009020

>>21008935
>b-but muh 100 years
dude stop trying to force this arbitrary number. proust was last century and more relevant than any living writer. european culture is vastly more relevant than american culture

>> No.21009026

>>21009020
Relevant where? The world at large is obsessed with American stuff. Be it books, movies, shows, comics, games...

>> No.21009328

>>21008088
>Galileo Galilei
A hack who stole all of his ideas, from Anglos, Frenchmen and Italians alike
>who's Leonardo Bruni
A literal whomst
>what is the Renaissance
Italian propaganda, centred around rejecting religious sincerity and historical fact in favor of paint-by-numbers artistic pastiche and 'feel good' fake chronologies

>> No.21009479

>>21009026
>American stuff
and note you didnt call it culture, because its too lowbrow and pleb to be called that.
also
>american comics
lmao, everyone especially this sight knows manga shits on comics, especially now that trannies took over the american comics industry

>> No.21009520

>>21009479
It's inherently culture, you're just salty that Americans have overall surpassed Europe. Europeans live in the past and are delusional enough to think they are still relevant like they were like two centuries ago.

>> No.21009560

>>21009520
lmao stupid faggot
>books
overwhelmingly a euro legacy from then till now. dont tell me youre so stupid as to deny this
>games
nowhere near as substantial as cultural artifacts as books. games train some skills but they are intellectually empty. same goes for most films and tv.

societies like america that hate real culture like poetry eventually niggerize themselves. europe as a beacon for civilization will probably last, as its mainly nafris growing who at least have a monotheistic background, while america brazilizes itself much faster.

>> No.21009584

>>21009479
>>21009560
>obviously ignoring cinema and television where Americans excel over others
holy cope kek
>inb4 he begins naming rancid irrelevant local productions no one cares about
>inb4 he copes by calling cinema "a lower art" or some nonsense

>> No.21009606

>>21009584
name film you think is at the level of tolstoy you dunce, so i can tell you why youre wrong

if youre really this stupid literature isnt for you

>> No.21009625
File: 2.22 MB, 480x405, d647c125cbf8f22012abbc93f1e3664b.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21009625

>>21009606
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "NOOOOO THAT DOESN'T COUNT"
>talking about contemporary stuff in CINEMA/TELEVISION
>brings up something completely unrelated from more than a CENTURY ago in ANOTHER art form
Europe is irrelevant these days, pal. And Russians don't even see themselves as Western... so good luck bringing them up. Overall pretty cringe reply.

>> No.21009630

>>21009625
no youre just a retarded pseud

>> No.21009638

>>21009630
cope

>> No.21009697

>>21009625
we were talking about culture in general. europe made lasting monuments in literature. film has powerful effects, but in its state doesnt have the intellectual bearings that literature has. everyone knows and people still hallow shakespeare. most people dont even remember the director of the godfather

film panders to mass audiences, and limits its themes to mass appeal, which degrades it. it still hasnt reached the stage of culturedness it should have from the start.

different mediums doesnt mean they cant be compared you retard. they both communicate the same themes.

mention some quotes and scenes from film and ill tell you why theres a better answer in literature

you wont be able to because you dont clearly know much about either medium.

>> No.21009727

note lotr was originally a novel and the film is fun but definitely for mass appeal

the godfather was originally a b grade novel. lets look at one of its major ideas:
>“Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.”
its a striking idea but when you think about it, fundamentally retarded. one might track their enemies closely but theyd still watch their inner circle constantly for signs of opposition. and one would avoid having potential assassins nearby. the entire quote is a caveat emptor, and the film doesnt get more sophisticated than this.

>> No.21009749

>>21009697
We were talking about modern culture and how America is obviously at the forefront or near the forefront in every medium.

For games you said they were plebeian or some shit and didn't count. Fair enough.

For comics you said Japan was better according to trannies. Fair enough.

For books you said Europe was better but a million years ago. Fair enough.

For cinema/television you said... Europe was still better at literature. This doesn't make any sense and it sounds like delusional cope.

We were discussing cultural RELEVANCY which you brought up in the first place. Books don't have the same cultural relevancy as cinema/television. I'm a /lit/bro but that's just a fact. The leading country in cinema/television is America, both historically and currently. Not a single European country even comes close.

Your sorry excuse is just cope and whine.

In short, my good man: America = culturally relevant. Europe = culturally irrelevant.

>> No.21009753

>>21009697
Film already peaked with culturedness prior to the second World War

>> No.21009770

>>21007941https://i.4cdn.org/lit/1663520010312854.jpg
Shakespeare is supreme for all time. The monstrously magnificent Wordsworth, Dickinson, Whitman, Stevens, and the perpetually underrated Bishop also come to mind as the best of his descendants: English owes so much to him that it remains the best by any standard.

>> No.21009773

>>21009770
>Dickinson, Whitman, Stevens
These are Americans.

>> No.21009786

>>21009749
>Books don't have the same cultural relevancy as cinema/television.
except film as a disposable medium is already dying shortly after its peak, and its peak was not very high. influence is not the same as quality. literature and film are inextricably related, and you really are stupid for thinking otherwise. literature will endure because it reveals more about our existence, and whatever this crop of films offers is already turning into dust.

>> No.21009793

>>21009749
also
>I'm a /lit/bro but that's just a fact.
youre obviously not really interested or knowledgable in literature or even fucking film, youre just another parasite looking for works to make you look smart

>> No.21009800

>>21009773
from op >the most important writers used English
im op and i clearly meant anglophones

>> No.21009809

>>21009770
>>21009800
i consider english the most important fraction of the canon. im actually not sure which cultures come next. russian? spanish? italian? french? ancient greek? all these claim the peaks in certain genres.

>> No.21009821

>>21009786
This is tremendous cope and you know it. Film is actually closer to music than it is to literature but that's not the point. The point is you find petty excuses to deal with the obvious, the elephant in the room and it's evident to every non-retarded person. We don't even know the limits of film because it's a young art form compared to literature. We were talking about RELEVANCY, now you change your tune to "quality." Even then, American cinema wins awards at Europe's most important film festivals. America is the most relevant producer in the most relevant medium of our days.

>> No.21009824

>>21009773
And? It's the largest anglophone land thus far. That in itself is an advantage so obvious that one expects it to be overlooked: Montaigne and Goethe are comparable, just, but this language is beyond everyone but Him.

>> No.21009825

>>21009809
the recent era means european english are still better than americans in literature. americans do have melville, but thats basically all their 19-20th c lit best has to offer. joyce beckett and eliot clearly stack much better. modern america has decent middleweights but no one at that level.

>> No.21009829

>>21009809
I don't view the Ancient Greeks as Western. They're from the Greco-Roman civilization, which is different, as noted by Spengler. I think the French have an equal importance in the Western canon.

>> No.21009835

>>21009824
At first I thought OP meant English literature rather than English-language literature.

>> No.21009837

>>21009829
when i said canon i just mean canon. doesnt have to limit to geography or period.

>> No.21009845

>>21009825
>the recent era means european english are still better than americans in literature
Not even true. America had a better 20th century than England when it comes to literature.
> joyce beckett and eliot
Those are two Irishmen (one of whom wrote in French) and an American-born writer lol

>> No.21009852

>>21009837
It also doesn't mean anything by itself. Just a vague concept. Canon for whom? about what? If you don't use parameters it's useless.

>> No.21009879

>>21009821
yes were aware of that but you said america overall surpasses europe (in general), which is wrong and what i rejected you idiot. europes culture will endure, the pax americanas influence is already waning, and with it respect for its cultural industry. britains empire died long ago and shakespeare mogs all of american lit put together.
>The world at large is obsessed with American stuff. Be it books
youre clearly wrong about their books here. among the classics, european lit still overshadows american lit and lines real bookshelves.

>>21009845
eliot renounced american citizenship and was right to do so.
>America had a better 20th century than England when it comes to literature.
did it? no real masterpieces. dont mention pynchon or cornmac, they are worse than eco, and even eco didnt write a real masterpiece.

>> No.21009897

>Those are two Irishmen
they wrote in english. i said european english didnt i

>> No.21009901

>>21009879
>eliot renounced american citizenship and was right to do so.
Still, Joyce and Beckett were not English like you incorrectly claimed.
>did it? no real masterpieces. dont mention pynchon or cornmac, they are worse than eco, and even eco didnt write a real masterpiece.
I'm not sure what Eco has to do with English literature but in America there's Faulkner, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Pound, Nabokov, Salinger, etc. Eliot published The Waste Land and The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock when he was still American.

>> No.21009906

>>21009845
>Not even true. America had a better 20th century than England when it comes to literature.
lets find out if thats true. 1984 is just entry level but already shits on 99% of high american novels. what were the best american lit works according to you?

>> No.21009908

>>21009897
Makes no sense to compare an entire continent against a single country.

>> No.21009911

>>21009901
>like you incorrectly claimed.
idiot people know theyre irish. if i made a slight mistake for convenience it doesnt mean i didnt know they were irish beforehand. that was joyces whole thing.

>> No.21009912

>>21009835
The allure of the former is irresistible from the perspective of the latter. The slide from poor to rich dish is inexorable as can be--at least while times are good. As times go otherwise, that's another matter more in the realm of cosmologists Lucretius would have wished for.

>> No.21009923

>>21009908
hilariously it shouldnt, but britain punches way above than its weight and totally mogs american lit.

>> No.21009936

>>21009923
Is that so? Because you named two Irish writers and an American-born poet (who btw published his most famous stuff while still young and American). Seems to me like England needs to call her friends to even put up a battle against America.

You are yet to name an Englishman.

>> No.21009942

>>21007941
What do you hope to gain from initiating a dick-measuring contest? Just enjoy great literature.

>> No.21009949

>>21009936
yes. ireland doesnt even respect its own identity. they write in english. :)

>> No.21009953

>>21009942
oh i dont care really. i hope britain burns. but its still true anglophone lit is the largest important chunk of the general literary canon.

>> No.21009957

>>21009953
>but its still true anglophone lit is the largest important chunk of the general literary canon.
In Anglo countries, sure. Every language puts a special emphasis on their own stuff.

>> No.21009966

>>21009957
no, shakespeare a few novelists and the romantics by themselves already destroy the entirety of french lit. what they cant do is beat the russian novel tradition.

>> No.21009969

>>21009966
>the romantics
Destroyed by Hugo and Baudelaire.

>> No.21009974

I didn't know the English were THIS retarded btw.
1984, my God.

>> No.21009988

>>21009969
the french are good at dark themes but no the english captured the essence of the human mind better. what did french lit reveal usefully about the human mind? they got stuck on empty coomer themes.

>> No.21009992

>>21009974
what i said is true. the great gatsby or tender is the night? even those are empty compared to entry level shit like 1984 weirdly enough

>> No.21010012

>>21009992
Faulkner is better than any English novelist of the 20th century. And then there's Nabokov who's also pretty good. Unsure why you bring up The Great Gatsby or 1984 lol

>> No.21010025

>>21010012
faulkner is a forced meme from the south desperately shilling someone half decent to represent them. he has a lot of style but not much substance. he is empty like his writing style. idiots acting like idiots and waxing poetic about it isnt great lit.

nabokov is much better but hes part of the 1%.

>> No.21010040

>>21007968
>Russian for science
Really? Not even German or French? You picked Russian?

>> No.21010074

>>21010040
that anons a pseud who doesnt know anything about any of those traditions or fields. idr if my post to him went through but i typed about french being historically the most important language for modern science.

>> No.21010098

>>21010074
okay it didnt. weird.

>> No.21011512

>>21007997
>Are you serious?
They did launch Sputnik first.

>> No.21012168

>>21007968
for science its english-german-french

>> No.21012219

for me it's italian-american english

>> No.21014039

>>21007968
How can you have this bad take.

>> No.21014341

>>21007941
The poet you posted used to read Italian literature in Italian editions. Enough said.