[ 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: 133 KB, 512x1728, 1343064308397.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3182495 No.3182495 [Reply] [Original]

I haven't been on here for like 2 years. Did you guys ever finalise a definitive answer on whether there are firm axioms with which to justify spending excess time and money on studying "high brow" literature and putting it on such a pedestal.

Like I'm wondering why governments fund art courses when there doesn't seem to be any objective criteria that can say why you should revere Ulysses more than 50 Shades of Gray?

Thanks in advance for your responses : )

>> No.3182504

Same with any other medium.

If you enjoy film you enjoy watching films that are well directed, acted and written.
If you enjoy music you enjoy listening to songs which demonstrate clear talent.
If you enjoy literature then why not enjoy individuals who are best able to articulate ideas, control narrative and write prose?

>> No.3182522

>>3182504
I enjoy delightfully bad written, acted and directed movies, because I can. Ed Wood > *

Same goes for music. And literature. Pulp novels and violent music only designed to satisfy my most primal urges are best. I greatly enjoy them.

Now what?

>> No.3182644

>>3182522

stop doing things just because you 'enjoy' them, you child.

>> No.3182860

What you enjoy is not the same as what is rewarding/makes you think. The two often overlap, but they don't necessarily have to. There are critical models that can tell us why Ulysses is a 'greater' work than 50 shades of gray, but to a reader or a theorist these works might be of equal interest.

>> No.3182884

>>3182522
accept that you're a helpless, hedonistic simpleton

>> No.3182905

>>3182644
>>3182884

Good lord, you lot are simply a more pretentious /v/.

You realize your view boils down to "Your fun isn't real, you filthy casual," right?

>> No.3182960

>>3182905
/v/ is hardly pretensions. Their standards are lower than a $2 hooker and the person who hires them.

>> No.3182964

>>3182905
I didn't say your 'fun' was any less real or valid than any other version—only that it makes you a simpleton

>> No.3182986

>>3182964
Enjoying a bad movie while realizing it is bad is different than the masses who fund Michael Bay. Generally, you can feel the passion and effort behind the "so bad they are good" movies. They fail on most levels, but the sincerity provides comedy. We're almost laughing at how bad they are despite their best efforts.

>> No.3183011

>>3182495

Because some things are subjectively better than others.

>> No.3183017

>>3183011
Aren't most things only subjectively better? Also, that implies that someone who prefers Twilight to The Brothers K has an opinion that deserves as much respect as someone who holds the opposite opinion.

>> No.3183024

>>3182905

The amusing thing is that the "fun is a buzzword" guy was completely correct and videogame fans genuinely are too stupid to understand that MUH FUNS is not the be-all and end-all of videogaming or, indeed, any experience.

>> No.3183050

>>3183024
Videogames really have quite a problem right now. Gigantic studios with millions of dollars are needed to produce top quality games, but they almost need to stick to formula to make a profit.

Indie developers have a lot more creative freedom, but are limited by their lack of resources.

Games take a long time to evolve compared to film and novels. Look at how long it took developers to stop including lives and points. Those only existed on arcade machines to eat quarters, but remained in home console titles for over a decade.....hell longer than that.

Once we can start having people gamers recognize as great game creators, we will start to have some real advancement. They will get lots of funding and money because gamers will eat up everything they make. That will allow for high brow experimentation in their games along with large budgets.

Similar to how movie directors end up commanding a large audience of dedicated fans that will support their latest projects, allowing studios to give them more money to work with.

>> No.3183063

Literary theory and literary criticism are, in most cases, the projection and extraction of philosophy onto and from literature as a means of coming to some moral or philosophical conclusion. And the same can be said for all set studies. At the core of art is philosophy, and communicating philosophic ideas.

Then you might like to argue that philosophy is trivial. In that case, I'd rather not speak with you right now.

Don't ever use that h word, it's never used in a genuinely positive context, and hardly anyone THINKS it means anything inherently positive.

>> No.3183066

>>3183063
art studies

>> No.3183086

>>3183050

>Once we can start having people gamers recognize as great game creators, we will start to have some real advancement.

This will almost certainly never happen. Ever heard of John Romero? how about Peter Molineux? The problem is that, unlike literature and mostly unlike film, there is no grand creative oversight role that can make a game good. An ambitious studio head can do some great things, to be sure, but unless everyone else working on the game is at least average, you'll only get dreck. And there's no reason for the people who actually do all the work to be better than average, because average at best is what pays.

Studio system is the death of creativity. Best case scenario is that you get something like the state of anime where one studio break their backs and produce something pretty amazing and then every other studio spends the next fifteen years trying lamely to recapture its appeal. this has already happened

>> No.3183092

>>3183086
I'm not into games but I have heard of those people from gamer friends. And Gabe Newell.

>> No.3183093

>>3183086
Maybe the development tools will advance to the point when an independent developer can match the quality of major studios, but I highly doubt it.

>> No.3183133

>>3183086
Hideo kojima and the mario dude are pretty big names

>> No.3183152

>>3183133
But not big enough to sell enough copies of a big budget game on name alone. They have also been mainly caught up in game series their entire career, which is why they are famous in the first place.