/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23442932]

>Keats died of tuberculosis at only 25, and some of his friends, including Percy Bysshe Shelley, claimed that his death had been hastened by the stress caused by negative reviews of his work in The Quarterly Review. Byron found that hilarious. He even made fun of him, posthumously, in his famous epic poem Don Juan:

>John Keats, who was killed off by one critique,
>Just as he really promised something great,
>If not intelligible, —without Greek
>Contrived to talk about the Gods of late,
>Much as they might have been supposed to speak.
>Poor fellow! His was an untoward fate: —
>‘Tis strange the mind, that very fiery particle,
>Should let itself be snuffed out by an Article.
The fuck was his problem?

[Anonymous No.23442965]

>>23442932
>how is cyber

[Anonymous No.23443017]

>>23442932
OHNONONO KEATSSISTERS HAVE WE BEEN BTFOD BY BYRONCHADS AGAIN???

[Anonymous No.23443041]

>>23443017
That's brutal, here's how Byron commented in the same situation (reading a positive review of Keats):
>Of the praises of that little dirty blackguard KEATES in the Edinburgh—I shall observe as Johnson did when Sheridan the actor got a pension. “What has he got a pension? then it is time that I should give up mine.”—Nobody could be prouder of the praises of the Edinburgh than I was—or more alive to their censure—as I showed in EB and SR—at present all the men they have ever praised are degraded by that insane article.—Why don’t they review & praise “Solomon’s Guide to Health” it is better sense—and as much poetry as Johnny Keates.

[Anonymous No.23443179]

>>23442932
Funny how Keats was an infinitely better poet than Byron. Second only to Shakespeare and even then it's close. Only lived to 25, no less. Get fucked.

[Anonymous No.23443598]

>Keats died in 1821
>Shelley died in 1822
>Byron died in 1824
And in one fell swoop died the entire movement of second generation English Romantic poetry. I blame English culture for suffocating their geniuses.

[Anonymous No.23443719]

>>23442932
incredibly based

[Anonymous No.23443744]

>>23443179
It was natural that the 19th century equivalent of a fuck boi would hate a depressive weirdo like Keats

[Anonymous No.23443765]

>>23442932
Keats was a lovely person. Donne is apparently a cheap fame-hound.

[Anonymous No.23443769]

>>23443017
Keats is the greater man. He saw real tragedy in his short life and in only five years of writing changed the landscape of poetry forever. He was a deep thinker and a gentle soul. Too based for this world.

[Anonymous No.23443797]

>>23443179
>Second only to Shakespeare and even then it's close.
lol

[Anonymous No.23444178]

>>23443769
i agree

[Anonymous No.23444179]

>>23443598
it's annoying that coleridge the underachiever and wordsworth the hack were the two that avoided early deaths

[Anonymous No.23444182]

>>23443797
if you read keats' odes and his other late work you'll realise this isn't a laughable opinion at all

[Anonymous No.23444187]

keats had a true and genuine love in fanny brawne, who influenced his poetry for the better
byron had lots of sex with italian princesses and various illegitimate children
the latter was probably more fun, but the former more beautiful

[Anonymous No.23444195]

>>23444179
Fuck you

[Anonymous No.23444200]

>>23443598
The sadness of the fact only adds to the romance which is ultimately what they would have wanted

[Anonymous No.23444201]

>>23444195
tbf wordsworth did some good stuff, it's just mostly shit

[Anonymous No.23444204]

>Shelley said of Keats, after inviting him to stay with him in Pisa after the latter fell ill: "I am aware indeed that I am nourishing a rival who will far surpass me and this is an additional motive & will be an added pleasure."
Bros, what could have been...

[Anonymous No.23444230]

A fever killed Byron, but I won't deny that he left us like a chad, he was fighting those filthy ottomans.

[Anonymous No.23444284]

I like them both.

[Anonymous No.23444419]

>>23444201
Kek. Tbf (you) need to read more before dropping incredibly stupid, ill informed opinions. Not only did Wordsworth (and Blake) break the new ground, but the two were by far the best English poets of the late 18th, early 19th century, and it isn't even close. What protects Keats? Fake nostalgia, and the fact that his entire poetic corpus and surviving letters can be read in a single day. That said, the odes really are great-- all five of them.

[Anonymous No.23444474]

>>23444419
tbf blake, wordsworth, and keats are all equally good, but blake and keats more-so
>>23444284
>.jpg
this you yeah ? you look like a sheep, mate

[Anonymous No.23444484]

>>23444419
So what do you think of Coleridge?

[Anonymous No.23444812]

>The kind of man that Keats was gets ever more horrible to me. Force of hunger for pleasure of every kind, and want of all other force—that is a combination!
>Shelley is a poor shrieking creature who has said or sung nothing worth a serious man being at the trouble of remembering.

[Anonymous No.23444859]

>>23443769
>short life
heh

[Anonymous No.23445160]

>>23444484
I love Coleridge, but then again, not alot of poetry. Biographia Literaria and The Friend essays prompt comparisons with the great essayists of that time-- Lamb, DeQuincey, among a few others, and a little later, Hazlitt. This assessment:
>>23444179
so far as Coleridge is concerned is merely Hazlitt's envy come down through the ages. Though a brilliant stylist, Hazlitt's not nearly as rich substantively, nor near so helpful to the reader, as Coleridge remains.
Some of his poetry is of course brilliant.

[Anonymous No.23445187]

>>23443769
This, while Byron wrote some neat stuff I wouldn't hesitate to let his whole oeuvre perish in the flames to save the ode to a nightingale alone.

[Anonymous No.23445215]

>>23444474
The problem with Keats is a complete lack of spontaneity, which doesn't at all apply to Shakespeare, Wordsworth, or even Byron. His best poems are like highly wrought jewels-- lovely, yes, but entirely self-contained. Was he endeavouring to break out of himself (as it were) before his untimely death? Yes, but unfortunately wasn't granted time enough for this to happen even to his own satisfaction. I truly get general 'love for Keats' -- his case really *is* tragic. Part of the tragedy being that even Shelley's a more valuable poet, in my opinion. Not to suggest that Keats has no value at all, because he clearly does, etc.

[Anonymous No.23445267]

>>23444812
>a poor shrieking creature
Yeah, ok Thom ass

[Anonymous No.23446415]

>>23444812
Carlyle’s opinions of his century’s poets/fiction writers is always funny lmao.

[Anonymous No.23446424]

>>23442932
he was a psycho who would do anything to feel powerful, hence his running off to some piddling war like it was the most important thing in the world

compare to today's Palestrannies

[Anonymous No.23446432]

>>23444484
wasn't it de Quincey who fucking roasted him for being a pseud when he got into religion and philosophy in old age
>>23444812
based Carlyle poster

[Anonymous No.23446577]

>>23446415
Kek. As are his opinions of most of his contemporaries as well as most of the historical personages he deals with. Strange thing is, when he likes someone (for instance, Mirabeau) he just can't stop sucking their dick. Odd duck.

[Anonymous No.23446586]

>>23443179
Dude, Shakespeare isn't even superior to Spenser or Sidney.

[Anonymous No.23446591]

>>23446586
Great insight. Precisely why Spenser and Sidney are read so much these days, and the Earl of Oxford all but ignored.

[Anonymous No.23446602]

>>23446591
Literature isn't a popularity contest dipshit

[Anonymous No.23446611]

>>23446602
Temporarily, it is. And I personally love Spenser.

[Anonymous No.23446849]

>>23446586
Literally insane. I could at least understood Spenser, but Sydney is just ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.23446863]

>>23446849
t. Bardolator

[Anonymous No.23448140]

>>23446611
*Temporally, rather

[Anonymous No.23449024]

>>23446432
>wasn't it...?
Hazlitt