/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22740102]

when did you realize 85% of literature considered to be good is actually trash and simply wrong and even propaganda for a false world view?

[Anonymous No.22740215]

>>22740102
Sometime last year

[Anonymous No.22740271]

>>22740102
nah it's more like 50%

[Anonymous No.22740288]

>>22740102
>>22740215
>>22740271
Ne 15 books that fit this description

[Anonymous No.22740289]

>>22740288
The Bible that's more than 15 now give me my crown

[Anonymous No.22740290]

>>22740288
>try to think of a book that fits this description
>can't
>panic.jpg
>try to think of ANY book
>can only think of harry potter

[Anonymous No.22740293]

>>22740102
Mind explaining?

[Anonymous No.22740295]

>>22740271
>>22740215
>>22740102
>>22740288
Name*

[Anonymous No.22740297]

>>22740289
Holy filtered

[Anonymous No.22740303]

>>22740102
I haven't realized that because it's not true

[Voluntary Fool No.22740586]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91gT68xeDMM

[Anonymous No.22740599]

>>22740586
What is this

[Anonymous No.22740603]

>>22740599
it's a pile of dogshit, don't touch it

[Anonymous No.22740610]

Sounds like Dan Schneider finally found this board

[Anonymous No.22740686]

>>22740102
85% might be a tad too high. But there's undoubtedly a great deal of dross labelled as "classic." The key seems to be not being good but striking a chord, autist to autist, with powerful academics who promote your book as an inscrutable work of great intelligence and saddle the next 10 generations with scratching their noggins to divine what brilliance there apparently is worth studying, which let's face it, is mostly invented by readers post-hoc in a way you could do about a piece in the evening news. Alice in Wonderland, Moby Dick, The Old Man and the Sea all immediately come to mind.
Then you have the other lot, the spicy takes, oh so topical at the time that had an understandable impact on readers within their specific zeitgeist but leave the modern reader laughing at the idea of such work being a world shattering view. Heart of Darkness and Fahrenheit 451 key offenders here, possibly to a lesser extent Catch 22 and Walden. Still, it's good to read them, gives you an insight into how others think, what others think is good and you can't be part of the conversation if you don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.22741169]

>>22740102
When I realized the writers look like shit and are socialist drug addicts

[Anonymous No.22741175]

>>22740102
When I read Sally Rooney's books and they were pretty bad despite the hype. I admit that Bobbi is likely the best literary character from the last decade though.

[Anonymous No.22741685]

>>22740102
I so hate that you are right about this and that it has been this way for a long time.

[Anonymous No.22741689]

>>22740289
If you're OP, you're not as enlightened as I thought.

[Anonymous No.22742753]

>>22741689
It's like that bell curve meme where you think I'm on the left but I'm on the right. I know more about theology than you.

[Anonymous No.22742890]

>>22740102
When I realized most of it affirms life

[Anonymous No.22742912]

>>22740102
Just now; thanks for letting me know!
>organizes a book burning

[Anonymous No.22742915]

when did you realize every post with a frog attached is written by a faggot and has nothing of value?

[Anonymous No.22743749]

>>22740102
I didn't but thanks for spoiling it asshole

[Anonymous No.22743761]

OP is a dumb fucking retard who accepts everything put in front of his face without question and needs to make that everyone else's problem

[Anonymous No.22743766]

>>22740102
...after letting myself get systematically mindfucked by russian shills on /pol/ from around 2015 onwards.

[Anonymous No.22743768]

>>22740686
>Moby Dick
filtered

[Anonymous No.22743781]

>>22740102
What books are you thinking about anon?

>I Hope to god you aren't a chud

[Anonymous No.22743800]

I’ve been going through the /lit/ top 100 and only thought two of the books were bad so far.

[Anonymous No.22743799]

>>22740686
I know Moby Dick didn't reach popularity until after Melville's death, and that academics were the ones that made the novel famous, but I think you're wrong about that one.

[Anonymous No.22743809]

>>22743800
Which two?

[Anonymous No.22743876]

>>22743809
Heart of Darkness (this was terrible)
The Sailor who fell from grace with the sea (this had some profound passages but wasn’t very good overall)

[Anonymous No.22743881]

>>22740102
All art is just a series of carefully planned distractions for the plebs

[Anonymous No.22743900]

>>22740102
the coherence theory of truth is when you are atlas
the foundationalist theory of truth is OP's good now

[Anonymous No.22743914]

>>22740102
When I first started reading.

[Anonymous No.22743961]

>>22740102
anyone who actually bothers to go through those "greatest novels ever" lists ends up realizing this. good literature is very rare, even among the classics

[Anonymous No.22744027]

there are a few camps of thought with literature that I notice a lot. First is the one we all know about, usually ladies who read harry potter and that sort of stuff, and teach middle school english and think any poem about race struggle or by a woman is the greatest thing ever. Then you have people, usually men, that say all new stuff is terrible and they love "the classics" or something like that and they talk about shakespeare and maybe herman melville and edgar allan poe and charles dickens. Then you have your sort of edgy guys who like usually russian and german literature and philosophy in dark settings and about depressing stuff. We all know people like this who fit into some camp and really want to identify in that sort of way, because for them literature is a personality accessory like a handbag is an accessory for a model. Very few people just read it and like it. I find the same kind of thing with most media, books, movies, tv shows, music, video games. When people make lists of "greatest books" or something like that you know it's nonsense

[Anonymous No.22744090]

>>22740288
I though the great gatsby was the absolute worst book that is considered to be in the greatest of the 20th century. It was like a script for a shitty fancy soap opera that would be on hbo. Ernest Hemingway, everything by him was boring. But everyone's got their own taste, some people find cool things in those books that I can't. There was obviously a huge cultural shift in the 1800s that totally transformed literature, I think a lot of stuff made in the 20th century that would have been considered bland before then had a new set of intellectuals ready to call it "deep and personal" and stuff like that, whereas older literature usually has less to do with petty personal stuff and more to do with grand, romantic ideas, which is usually going to turn into an interesting book more easily than something about a regular guy.

[Anonymous No.22744105]

>>22740102

after reading dosto

[Anonymous No.22744227]

>>22740102
February 2nd 2001.

[Anonymous No.22744524]

>>22743768
>>22743799
Moby Dick is not in any sense "good". Its pacing is abominable, its structure so unengaging it must be by design, the tone and language is completely out of touch with the mundanity of the story, the plot is incredibly one dimensional and boring and that's all without mentioning the pages upon pages upon pages of technical description regarding 19th century whaling. It is simply not good. Yet I will concede it is a curiosity. I am not from its great nation of origin and I've noticed over the years it's exclusively beloved and defended by Americans. This has lead me to the conclusion that the novel has captured some particular American essence, some Yankee saudades that is very special for you and excuses how bad it ultimately is as a work of fiction. The fact that it's not just academics but litizens that love it gives me genuine pause. I suspect there's something crystalized in there for your people that excuses its flaws and is sadly invisible for the rest of us.