/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6089491]

>That family friend who only reads and constantly recommends or sends you books by edgy, entry level "public intellectuals" with stupidly inflammatory opinions

[Anonymous No.6089503]

>tfw no friends

[Anonymous No.6089514]

If you're a public intellectual the temptation to publicly troll people must be strong as fuck.

Why else would Hitchens have written "Why Women aren't Funny?"

[Anonymous No.6089524]

>>6089491
Is there anyone more pretentious than Hitchens?

[Anonymous No.6089540]

>>6089524
Even if you're not a fedora you could admire his rhetoric

[Anonymous No.6089542]

>>6089524

PhD students in fields like Philosophy and Religious Studies

[Anonymous No.6089547]

>>6089524
oh man that pic

[Anonymous No.6089553]

I have a family friend like that. The fact that said family friend knows I am a Political Science major is the reason I end up with books by "public intellectuals" on my doorstep every three months.

[Anonymous No.6089554]

>>6089540
Absolutely. He was one of the most gifted rhetoricians I've ever seen (and I had the privilege of seeing him in person when he came to my college for a debate). But it seemed like he knew this, and instead of using his rhetorical powers for causes he genuinely believed in he just jerked himself off. His style was beautiful, but incredibly self indulgent. That's why I've grown jaded to the "public intellectuals" who appear persuasive, but further analysis reveals their ideas to be nothing but woo-woo peddling.

[Anonymous No.6089583]

>>6089553

Why do people do this?

Without fail, people find out that your major interest is [insert anything] and so they (someone only casually interested in said subject) feel the need to recommend you entry level works on a regular basis.

Happens to me with literature of all kinds. It's like, why would I take your lit rec, dude? I read multiple books a week and you read one book every 4 months and don't even care that much about reading.

My brother in law is just like that. If I want sports advice, I'd go to him because he knows sports. I don't need reading advice from him.

[Anonymous No.6089595]

>>6089554
>>6089491

I'm curious - who else do you rank in his league?

I think your description is bang-on except for the generalization. He's kind of singular. In North America, everyone else is either a reporter, pundit, or academic.

I feel as though his secret sauce is that there are 9000 of him in the UK and if I ever watched QI or whatever, I'd immediately get the source of the eloquence...

But really, he was world-leading. Not for thought, but for rhetoric.

[Anonymous No.6089610]

>>6089503
This. Just be glad you got a friend to share books with.

[Anonymous No.6089626]

>>6089491

Sounds like he got to you anon.

[Anonymous No.6089629]

>>6089583

You might. You seem close minded.

[Anonymous No.6089634]

>>6089595
In terms of rhetoric, Steven Pinker has always impressed me. His aside on feminism at the beginning of this debate was one of the most tactful things I've ever seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bTKRkmwtGY

It also helps that Pinker is an immensely intelligent man with the firepower to back up his ideas. Not that Hitchens wasn't intelligent, but he was (like you said) not a world-leading thinker. Other than him, I can't think of any others who are up there on Hitchens' level of rhetorical prowess.

[Anonymous No.6089648]

>>6089629

In what way? I'm close-minded because pretty much my only interest is literature and I don't want to be recommended bestseller books I've already heard about somewhere else on account of not living under a rock?

[Anonymous No.6089649]

>>6089634
Forgot to mention the aside is at 6:25.

[Anonymous No.6089870]

>>6089491
nobody in my family really reads, nor do any family friends do

my dad reads i guess, he's 55 y/o and reads pop lit, he's read all the hunger games books, has read some twilight, told me he made it 70 pages into 50 shades of gray, etc. He knows I'm 2intellectual4him so he doesn't recommend me any books, just asks my opinions on them

[Anonymous No.6089871]

>>6089542

They're only "pretentious" to those who don't "get" the lingo of the field

[Anonymous No.6089872]

>>6089491
Hitchens was so much more than an edgy, entry level public intellectual with stupidly inflammatory opinions. He was a passionate defender of justice, a man with an almost impeccable memory, a master rhetorician, and what you consider stupidly inflammatory opinions was his ironic sense of humor. There have only ever been two deaths of famous people that have made me truly sad: the death of Christopher Hitchens and the death of Gabriel García Márquez. Hitchens had such a huge presence that the world really does feel a little emptier without him. I'll miss seeing him troll guests on American news stations.

[Anonymous No.6090012]

>>6089872
can we be friends?

[Anonymous No.6090037]

>>6089649
Thanks. I disagree re: Pinker matching Hitchens' eloquence, but he's as articulate as hell and that's a great debate vid.

[Anonymous No.6090052]

>>6089872

definitely

[Anonymous No.6090059]

>>6089872

I cringed

[Anonymous No.6090138]

>>6089872
No he was not remotely original or interesting. A decent orator and nothing more

[Anonymous No.6090203]

>>6089872
>He was a passionate defender of justice

Holy shit...

[Anonymous No.6091215]

>>6089872
>passionate defender of justice
>unapologetically supported the invasion of Iraq

[Anonymous No.6091257]

>>6091215
>muh national sovereignty

[Anonymous No.6091688]

>>6091215
his position on the iraq war was much more nuanced then you think. he supported it because he believed in justice and freedom and thought US military action was the best possible way to promote that in iraq (it was really -- what other options were there?)

[Anonymous No.6091743]

>>6089524

Bill Maher runs circles around anyone when it comes to pretentiousness.

[Anonymous No.6091779]

>>6091743

Except when he can't argue his point very well, such as when he called a professor full of "liberal bullshit" for arguing that, hey, this "Islam" religion isn't such a bad guy after all

[Anonymous No.6091806]

>>6091779
Yeah, except he's kind of been right all along on the topic of Islam. The term "liberal bullshit" may not be very eloquent but he's talking about the extreme sensitivity and political correctness that is doing a lot more harm than good. Even leftists recognize this.

[Anonymous No.6091808]

>>6091743
Maher presents everything wrong with new atheism, Hitchens and Dawkins don't even count in the same league

[Anonymous No.6091816]

>tfw I used to be a Hitchens fanboy
>tfw my life is a series of retrospectively embarrasing phases

[Anonymous No.6091824]

>>6089524
>Is there anyone more pretentious than Hitchens?

"I have been called arrogant myself in my time, and hope to earn the title again, but to claim that I am privy to the secrets of the universe and its creator — that's beyond my conceit."

[Anonymous No.6091842]

>>6091816
Curiously enough, one can never grow out of Hitchens. One can only shrink out of him.

[Anonymous No.6091885]

terry eagleton > shitkins/ditchkin/bitchkins

[Anonymous No.6091896]

>don't know who hitchens was (not American)

>look him up

>full supporter of the "American must be the police force of the world" position

Into the trash it goes

[Anonymous No.6092832]

>>6091896

Hitchens was well known in British circles long before he became a U.S. citizen

[Anonymous No.6092840]

>>6091688
not blowing the country to shit, maybe?

[Anonymous No.6092859]

>>6091806

As someone earning an academic minor in Religious Studies, I'm afraid I have to disagree. The Qur'an, like The Bible, is open to multiple interpretations, which can be spun in any number of ways. It's important to understand the historical context of the text, and equally important to understand that religion or religiosity is not itself an impediment to modernity, except in the hands of those who abuse religion to serve that purpose.

[Anonymous No.6092905]

>>6092859
>The Qur'an, like The Bible, is open to multiple interpretations

False equivalence. It may be true that they're open to multiple interpretations, but the books and religions created around the books promulgate some very different ideas, and so I don't think it's fair to say that all of the atrocities committed by Muslims were mere happenstance, that Christians could just as easily have committed the same crimes. You can point to Christianity's violent past all you want, but the truth of the matter is that it's 2015 and Christianity has evolved. Is it possible Islam could also evolve such that the violent groups no longer exist? Sure, but as long as thousands of people are being killed, as long as women are being persecuted, as long as girls are being mutilated, I don't think it's the best idea we wait for that to happen. We need to apply force. What Hitchens feared was totalitarianism. He was worried that these Islamist groups like ISIS would grow, using violent means if necessary, to form theocratic dictatorships. I think his views were well-justified.