/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22607851]

>author satirizes thing
>no one gets it
>becomes genre defining example of said thing
Other than picrel and The Prince, what book?

[Anonymous No.22607986]

>>22607851
Lolita, Dune, the Call of Cthulu, Notes from the Underground, Brave New World, Temple of the Golden Pavilion...

[Anonymous No.22607993]

Prove the prince is a satire. I bet you can't.

[Anonymous No.22607999]

American Psycho

[Anonymous No.22608003]

>>22607986
What exactly did Dosto satirize with Notes?

[Anonymous No.22608016]

>>22608003
4chan

[Anonymous No.22608029]

>>22607851
>>22607986
lolita is a pretty good example of this
if you finish the book.. it's a very good argument against doing whatever you would call what Humbert did. Lolita remains forevermore the absolute love of his life, and she hates his guts. He dies utterly broken by the whole ordeal, the poor idiot.

I can see how someone would get to page 100 and think, "this is CP smut!" but damn, if you keep going, it does not go well for him. it's very tragic for everyone involved, including him.

that said, Nabokov has been very adamant that lolita is specifically not a satire, and that it's not "about anything." In his eyes it's just a book.

[Anonymous No.22608059]

>>22607993
I can't prove it, but it is and you know it. Niccolo was a Wilson when in power.

[Anonymous No.22608101]

>>22608029
lolita is about 20th century Americana and the English language from the perspective of an aging European

[Anonymous No.22608105]

>>22607986
Well go on then...

[Anonymous No.22608120]

>>22608059
If it is, then so are the discourses on Livy. A few times he refers you to the Prince where he's already dealt with a subject in depth

[Anonymous No.22608151]

>>22607851

[Anonymous No.22608175]

>>22608151
he lived his literature

[Anonymous No.22608182]

>>22608029
But you realize that in things coming to pass this way the author has achieved exactly what they meant to. The audience coming to idolize the satire is the greatest satire of all.

[Anonymous No.22608243]

>>22608029
thats not what satire means, its a tragedy

satire needs to be comedic to some extent otherwise its useless as a descriptor

[Anonymous No.22608284]

>>22608059
>Niccolo was a Wilson
that is such an ironic statement
you people really are imbeciles

[Anonymous No.22608299]

>>22608284
>coming from someone too dumb to get the book

[Anonymous No.22608303]

>>22608120
its one thing to adapt your principles to reality. its another to act on totally contradictory principles. the book fake.

[Anonymous No.22608304]

>>22607851
starship troopers

[Anonymous No.22608305]

>>22608175
I love this argument that comes up literally every time Sade is brought up. He lived it and recognized the failings and misery that such a lifestyle brought, making him best equipped to tell the tale.
Most of his works aren't satire anyway, they're tragedy, but 120 Days can be read as one, which is the only work that he is well known for.

[Anonymous No.22608309]

>>22608175
lived it in his head while he was imprisoned, yes

[Anonymous No.22608332]

>>22607851
Wtf book is OP’s picrel supposed to be- I’ve found this YA book when searching “book about turtle covered in jewels.” Surely this can’t be correct

[Anonymous No.22608335]

>>22608003
Notes is supposed to be a takedown of Enlightenment ideology and Romanticism through a realist novella.

[Anonymous No.22608338]

>>22607851
What is picrel?

[Anonymous No.22608418]

>>22608305
he grew alongside his literature and saw his ideology come to its logical conclusion but to call it satirical is a bit shortsighted imo

[Anonymous No.22608477]

>>22608338
Maybe Against Nature - Joris-Karl Huysmans

[Anonymous No.22608498]

>>22608299
>I disagree with the straightforward logical conclusions presented in the book because they make me feel bad
>but the book is considered important so I can't just tell the author to touch grass incel
>uh it was satire

[Anonymous No.22608538]

>>22608101
i don't agree. i think it's about a pedophile and the tragically doomed quest to capture a unicorn

>>22608243
yes, that's what i said. it's not a satire. it's a tragedy.

[Anonymous No.22608839]

>>22608418
I believe it can be read as satire, not that it necessarily is or only was intended as one. People who claim the latter are either coping or disingenuous. It's mostly the depiction of the Catholic monks and the four friends representing the four branches of power that make me claim satire, especially the Président being the most odious of the bunch reads to me as a pointed attack. Now that I'm thinking, one could even argue that the label extends to the portrayal of the whores and the procuresses, with whom Sade was well-acquainted with and had ample reason to hate (as much as he "loved"/needed them).
With Sade the line between satire and bitter spitefic is razor thin, however, and I feel like he vacillates constantly depending on his moods and whims, in a lot of his writing. Not to mention that what classifies as "satire" in the first place is highly contested even on clearer topics. If I write a satire about my family, can it still be called satire? What if I write it about my school? How large does the institution have to be, and how many does it need to affect to earn that title? Can I write a satire about myself? If I accidentally write satire when seething about my enemies is it still satire?
Anyway, agree that it's just as shortsighted to contest that 120 Days is only intended as satire as it is to contest that it's only le pee pee le poo poo. It's a lot of things, many of which I'm still trying to figure out.
>t. autism

[Anonymous No.22608859]

>>22608332
>>22608338
>>22608477
Yes A rebours. In an episode of vanity a neurotic aristocrat bejewels a tortoise.
The book is sort of the american psycho of 19th cent. france for a really modern comparison, that includes pages of banal contemporary refrences. Quite a read.

[Anonymous No.22608870]

>>22608859
yeah it actually does seem pretty cool
did you read it in english?

[Anonymous No.22608986]

>>22608870
Yes my french is not on the level to read this. Nor did I get all the references, especially all the various writers, but there are so abundant that they form an aesthetic appeal on their own.

[Anonymous No.22610234]

>>22607851
just quibbling but people do usually get it at the time but soon after 10-20 years *then* people forget and it becomes the defining example of said thing. Time decays all.

and the biggest example I think that's redefined the word itself is Symposium. symposium was a space for enjoyment via women and wine, the dialogue is about /overturning/ this in favor of a symposium of the mind, now there is only symposiums of mind

[Anonymous No.22610274]

>>22608870
it has its highlights.

[Anonymous No.22610344]

>>22608029
No shit. Is this board populated by uneducated people? I though it was for the book nerds, but every other poster says most obvious of things and imagines himself as a genius, who in his unmatched wisdom, actually read the fucking book before posting

[Anonymous No.22610402]

>>22607851
Is the Picrel AI?

[Anonymous No.22610551]

>>22607851
>AI Tranny
>pushes the reddit theory of le prince is le satire xD
Who woulda thunken!

[Anonymous No.22610564]

>>22608003
Incels

[Anonymous No.22610568]

>>22608029
>Nabokov has been very adamant that lolita is specifically not a satire, and that it's not "about anything." In his eyes it's just a book.

Sounds like a pedo if i ever heard one

[Anonymous No.22611208]

>>22607851
I've been told that what happened with Pride and Prejudice

[Anonymous No.22611499]

>>22607986
>dune
>call of cthulu

loser

[Anonymous No.22611532]

>>22610402
yes

[Anonymous No.22611541]

>>22610551
i actually came to the theory on my own in my freshman year after reading it. and im not the only one. a lot of people come to that conclusion independently after reading and knowing his history.