[ 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: 52 KB, 309x475, 51545tm7azl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
647332 No.647332 [Reply] [Original]

Absolute drivel or high art only appreciated by the truly educated?

>> No.647334

The latter.

If you agree with the former, then you're just butthurt that you don't get it.

>> No.647333

Both at the same time.

>> No.647338

The former.

If you agree with the latter, you just wiki'd it.

>> No.647340

I appreciated it when I was 16, I don't think you really need to be "truly" educated. I've read it through about 4 times and it keeps getting better.

>> No.647342

I tried to read it. I really did.

I'm convinced it's a bunch of bullshit Faulkner shat out in a drunken stupor and laughed all the way to the bank as morons ate it up. Knowing that morons still eat it up to this day would probably cause him to roll over in his grave at such a high RPM he would cause a China syndrome.

>> No.647345

>>647342
he mad

>> No.647402

It was okay. Not drivel, but not a masterpiece either. It was meh.

>> No.647421

>>647333
This.

It's Faulkner. Some people divide lit-buffs into "people who like Faulkner," and "people who don't like Faulkner."

Personally, I think Faulkner is the shit.

>> No.647463

Faulkner's overrated. Read his Nobel Prize acceptance speech. "The eternal truths and verities of the human heart"? PUH-LEEZE. If there is some way in which "truths" are different from "verities"---and that is not sheer rhetoric being belched forth from an alcoholic graphomaniac---it eludes me. I'd rather read someone who uses words as something more than flatulent windy folderol.

>> No.647491

>>647463
this post is a masterwork of irony, i await your nobel prize

>> No.647498

>>this post is a masterwork of irony, i await your nobel prize

As well you should. My name is Kilgore fucking Trout, and I was promised one by my Creator.

Seriously, have you read "Requiem for a Nun"? Have you read "Soldier's Pay"? Read them and tell me you still believe Faulkner is a great writer.

Or better yet....read "Sanctuary" by Faulkner, then read "No Orchids for Miss Blandish" by James Hadley Chase, THEN read Orwell's essay "Raffles and Miss Blandish". THEN tell me what you think of Faulkner.

Fuck you, you pretentious jackass. Go back to Yoknapatawpha and have sex with your cousins.

>> No.647503

>>647498

>read Faulkner's worst books, then form your opinion

You are a bad person

Although Requiem for a Nun was actually pretty great

>> No.647607

I'll just read Go Down, Moses, and Absalom, Absalom! and Light In August and not jerk off to the fantasy of writers whose works are all equally flawless.

>> No.647610

Faulkner, what poppycock.

>> No.647619

>>647498
Sanctuary was only written for money.

As for The Sound and the Fury, it's a masterpiece. There isn't a character in all of literature that's pissed me off more than Jason Compson.

And also the bit from Quentin's section saying that victory is an illusion of "philosophers and fools" is just great.

>> No.647721

>>647619

Amen, and Quentin is probably one of the most human characters in all of American literature. His section is one of the greatest chapters in American letters.

>> No.647726

>>646033
Not my favorite way of putting it, but I do believe that you hit the nail on the head. I never thought about it like that.

>> No.647747

>>647342

You're kind of a retard. Do you even know anything about Faulkner's career??! His works sold hardly at all until he won the Nobel Prize 30 years after "The Sound and the Fury" had been written. Before that, he was nearly always poor or in debt. He hardly laughed his way to the bank until he won the Nobel.

>> No.647756

>>646033
I think there are limits to "freedom of speech" and you just crossed the line. Reported.