Is it true that the reason a woman has never written a masterpiece because of patriarchy and having next to no rights until 100 years ago?

File: 21 KB, 250x239, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:23:51 2016 No.8500449 [Reply] [Original]

Is it true that the reason a woman has never written a masterpiece because of patriarchy and having next to no rights until 100 years ago?

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:26:04 2016 No.8500463

>>8500449
>a woman has never written a masterpiece
Oh yeah I'm sorry lemme just burn my copies of Middlemarch and Jane Eyre how about that

Also, in part, but I hardly ever believe that societal oppression forms a proper barrier to creative work. Russians were dying left and right and facing mass killings/doublethink and shit under the Soviets but it didn't stop them from writing some great shit

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:29:28 2016 No.8500482 yeah man women werent allowed to get a pencil and 20 sheets of paper or theyd get stoned didnt you kno

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:31:20 2016 No.8500493 File: 15 KB, 220x326, SongOfSolomon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8500449 > Is it true that the reason a woman has never written a masterpiece

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:39:07 2016 No.8500532 Flannery O'Connor was taken from us too soon

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:39:50 2016 No.8500534 >>8500449 Your thread wouldn't be shit if it weren't for the influx of /r9k/ on this board. But if you've lurked for two days you know this thread would just turn into an /r9k/ circlejerk, so it's just bait. kys

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:41:00 2016 No.8500539 >>8500463 Women weren't allowed to be educated for pretty much all of human history. Not being able to read and write is a pretty big barrier to writing a masterpiece.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:41:20 2016 No.8500541 Margaret Atwood has written masterpieces A Handmaids Sandwich

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:41:25 2016 No.8500542 >>8500463 >>8500482 >>8500493 >>8500532 >>8500534 lol, trolled H A R D

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:43:27 2016 No.8500555 >>8500542 Or you were

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:44:35 2016 No.8500559 Women haven't written a masterpiece because the female brain simply isn't suited to such endeavors There have been some good books written by women but they simply cannot equal a man

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:44:49 2016 No.8500561 >>8500493 possibly one of the most overrated books ever written and this is a world where harry potter exists

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:46:02 2016 No.8500567

>>8500449

Before anyone concludes that women can't write, consider the possibility that women have written masterpieces, but they weren't allowed to be published because men thought it ludicrous that women could write good books.

Why do you think such a sizeable amount of masterpieces written by women were released under male pseudonyms?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:46:49 2016 No.8500569 >>8500561 >>possibly one of the most overrated books ever written Of course it is. Anything that doesn't fit your narrative you shill is over rated garbage.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:48:45 2016 No.8500581 >>8500567 This is WE WUZ KANGZ tier logic

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:49:18 2016 No.8500582 >>8500581 >This is WE WUZ KANGZ tier logic OP is worse and so are you. You are killing this board.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:50:24 2016 No.8500584 >>8500463 Are you really going to hold up Middlemarch to Ulysses or the works of Shakespeare? Absolutely neck yourself.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:51:51 2016 No.8500589

>>8500584
>Are you really going to hold up Middlemarch to Ulysses or the works of Shakespeare?

Honestly do you power rank all literature in determining greatness? Who really doesn't understand literature? And James Joyce is largely the "over rated" one anyways. This used to be consensus here.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:53:30 2016 No.8500594 >>8500589 Lol. Just lol. What was even the point of that reply?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:53:34 2016 No.8500595 >>8500581 And that's /pol/ tier criticism, you fucking pleb piece of shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:54:24 2016 No.8500599 >>8500591 >Lol. Just lol. What was even the point of that reply? Telling you that you should post about things on your comprehension level like on /vg/

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:55:10 2016 No.8500601 >>8500595 lmao STFU ju-male cucklord >__<

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:56:39 2016 No.8500608 >>8500599 You just misread your own post. Entirely unsurprising that you can't read, comparing Middlemarch to Ulysses. Lol.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:57:33 2016 No.8500611 >>8500608 >>You just misread your own post. Nope. I didn't. Shill again. Reply to this post and shill some more.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:58:22 2016 No.8500615 >>8500611 Shilling for Joyce? You don't even know the meaning of the terms you use.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:58:31 2016 No.8500618 File: 345 KB, 620x770, 1457360761798.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8500595 I'm still correct though

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:58:44 2016 No.8500619 >>8500608 james joice is afucking kike

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:58:46 2016 No.8500620 >>8500569 go back to r/books

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:59:10 2016 No.8500621 >>8500615 You know what I mean by shilling son

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 12:59:45 2016 No.8500625 >>8500618 brat is a nigger faggot

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:00:11 2016 No.8500627 >>8500620 Go back to /r9k/. We have this thread fucking every day. Shut the fuck up.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:01:17 2016 No.8500633 >>8500534 >>8500569 >>8500595 >>8500611 >>8500621 >>8500627 Get the fuck out please.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:01:47 2016 No.8500635 >>8500633 No Leave. Now.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:03:28 2016 No.8500641 >>8500635 Go back to /soc/ you whore, your posts are worthless and off topic.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:05:12 2016 No.8500649 >>8500641 You are the whore here anon. You're getting triggered people here can talk about literature. You honestly think you can censor people from talking about it. It's very silly

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:07:20 2016 No.8500658 >>8500649 You aren't talking about literature. Here is a summary of your contribution to the thread: >/r9k/ >/pol/ >shill Fuck off.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:09:40 2016 No.8500666

>>8500658
>You aren't talking about literature. Here is a summary of your contribution to the thread:

I was then you said it was over rated garbage and proceeded to make a useless comparison that shows a fundamental lack of understanding of literature. This shows you know shit all and aren't worthy of conversation.

I will call you shill because that's all you are doing. Shilling your politics and leaking from /his/

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:15:01 2016 No.8500686 >>8500666 >m-middlemarch is just as g-good as ulysses >w-what? you disagree? reeee go back to /pol/ /his/ /r9k/ you shill

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:15:52 2016 No.8500691 >>8500686 Who are you quoting frognigger?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:16:28 2016 No.8500695 >>8500686 I pointed out that James Morrison has enough awards and enough actually useful people have called her works masterpieces. I provided an example. You have just whined.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:17:30 2016 No.8500699 >>8500695 Excuse me. Toni Morrison. I had a freudian slip there.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:18:59 2016 No.8500704 >>8500695 People have called Harry Potter a masterpiece.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:19:55 2016 No.8500709 File: 1.87 MB, 1600x2400, Harry-Potter-And-The-Philosophers-OLD.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] The most popular book in history was written by a woman.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:22:51 2016 No.8500718

Women want it all.

They should be glad barring the two, three outliers their brains don't allow for autistic obsession with such things. More time to enjoy life.

But now they want to be validated in their intellectual capacities too?

At what price?

You think you can have your makeup tutorials and write anything profound at the same time?

How many men have written masterpieces?

Conceited dolts, both sides. But women take the cake with their solipsism for sure.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:23:18 2016 No.8500720

>>8500704
>actually useful people have called her works masterpieces.
>actually useful people

Oh you know, people who are especially powerful who wouldn't give Harry Potter the light of day. Literary academia. And it's been consensus since the 70's she's quite a talented writer, prolific, heartfelt. Meaningful, almost her work is largely undeniably great.

But yes. It is the same as Harry Potter anon. There is no noticeable difference.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:24:19 2016 No.8500725 >>8500718 >You think you can have your makeup tutorials and write anything profound at the same time? Hahahaha what

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:25:54 2016 No.8500731 >>8500720 Irony. But yes. Middlemarch is the same as Ulysses anon. There is no noticeable difference.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:27:49 2016 No.8500740 >>8500589 Lurk more newfag

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:28:00 2016 No.8500741 >>8500731 I never suggested that? And I never said Middlemarch either. Song of Solomon has near universal praise from literary critics. She has a Nobel Prize for god's sake. What more do you exactly want to bitch about

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:29:03 2016 No.8500747 >>8500740 Nobody says that here, lurk more before you pretend to be a regular to mass shill

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:30:07 2016 No.8500749 >>8500741 Why are you trying to argue with a shitposter you retarded newfag

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:31:05 2016 No.8500754 File: 19 KB, 225x225, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >its a wonan plays with language to avoid defending her "point" before resorting to ad hominem episode

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:31:43 2016 No.8500760 >>8500754 pippi the froge is a nigger faggot prove me wrong

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:32:01 2016 No.8500761 >>8500754 >>its a wonan plays with language to avoid defending her "point" before resorting to ad hominem episode This thread started out with logical fallacies and word play.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:35:31 2016 No.8500776 >>8500747 If I wanted my own comeback I'd scrape it off yet tongue. Now nix bitch

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:38:04 2016 No.8500787 >>8500776 Nope

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:45:14 2016 No.8500805

>>8500539
To people actually believe this? Before women had the vote, the upper class females were educated more than the lower class men. Look at Jane Austen for example. Not to mention the female Greek poet fragments. The reason women have published less great things than men is that they trend towards mediocrity. It is a harsh truth that people need to accept and get on with their lives.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:46:21 2016 No.8500807 >>8500805 >It is a harsh truth that people need to accept and get on with their lives. Except it isn't. And rich aristocrats are usually not the artists. They're rich aristocrats.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:48:50 2016 No.8500814

>>8500807
>it isn't
Quality rebuttal, I would expect nothing else from a woman.
>rich aristocrats aren't usually artists
No segment of the population is usually artists, I was simply pointing out that your assertion women had no access to education is utter bunk.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:50:01 2016 No.8500817 >>8500814 >>Quality rebuttal, I would expect nothing else from a woman. Ok. >No segment of the population is usually artists, That's actually wrong, it's usually disadvantaged people. Throughout history.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:50:43 2016 No.8500820 >>8500807 You argue exactly like a woman >thoughtless dismissal of main point >goes off on tangent You discredit your sex

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:52:07 2016 No.8500827 >>8500817 Aah yes those members of the literate class, so disadvantaged to the serfs and plebeians below them!

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:53:56 2016 No.8500832

>>8500820
>You argue exactly like a woman

Ok. You said this in the other shill thread.

>You discredit your sex

Hyperbole isn't your strong suit.

>>8500827
>Aah yes those members of the literate class, so disadvantaged to the serfs and plebeians below them!

Do you just think that the poor among men and women don't read. Throughout history Except that's wrong. And most art comes from that point, and from a source of pain. Especially literature. Literature is confrontation.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:54:24 2016 No.8500834

>>8500817
No shit you dumb bitch there are more disadvantaged people than privileged aristocrats. If you adjusted each population and measured percentage of artists from each then we could properly discuss this topic but nobody's gonna do that shit so fuck you anyway

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:54:59 2016 No.8500839 >>8500832 The poor don't have time to write a novel if they are starving to death.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:55:49 2016 No.8500846

>>8500817
The second part cant be true can it? Artists tend to be poor, yes I can see that, but poor people tend to be artists? I don't think so.

Somebody please give me evidence in either direction, please. I've always assumed wealthy -> more leisure and freedom -> greater ability to create art unimpeded

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:56:06 2016 No.8500847

>>8500834
>>No shit you dumb bitch there are more disadvantaged people than privileged aristocrats. If you adjusted each population and measured percentage of artists from each then we could properly discuss this topic but nobody's gonna do that shit so fuck you anyway

Nah fuck you.

>>8500839
>The poor don't have time to write a novel if they are starving to death.

And yet they have.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:56:30 2016 No.8500849 >>8500832 Throughout the majority of history the poor were not literate you utter dunce.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:57:10 2016 No.8500853 >>8500846 >Somebody please give me evidence in either direction, please. I've always assumed wealthy -> more leisure and freedom -> greater ability to create art unimpeded Holy shit

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:57:19 2016 No.8500856 >>8500832 >And most art comes from that point, and from a source of pain. Ahahaha, the poor were literally illiterate.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:57:41 2016 No.8500857 >>8500847 I accept your admission of defeat and invite you to suck it

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:58:36 2016 No.8500865
File: 74 KB, 720x529, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8500847
Hang on a minute, I'm sensing a discrepancy in your logic here. If poor and disadvantaged people were the most prolific authors throughout history, and women were/are poor and disadvantaged to men, why are there so few female authors?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:58:44 2016 No.8500866 >>8500853 ?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 13:58:47 2016 No.8500867 >>8500849 Since the 19th century. Besides when it wasn't literature, it was art. Mostly condemned. >>8500856 I'm talking creation of art. People at the time who would have otherwise gotten into literature today, were into religion at the time.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:00:18 2016 No.8500874

>>8500865
>Hang on a minute, I'm sensing a discrepancy in your logic here. If poor and disadvantaged people were the most prolific authors throughout history, and women were/are poor and disadvantaged to men, why are there so few female authors?

At this point in time there are not.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:00:56 2016 No.8500876 >>8500867 You lost this thread eight posts ago lady.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:02:27 2016 No.8500881 >>8500874 Why is it impossible for you to directly answer a question Women equivocate worse than Catholics I swear

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:03:38 2016 No.8500886 >>8500874 >at this point in time You should be a politician the amount of times you try to weasel out of questions.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:03:49 2016 No.8500887 >>8500876 Ok >>8500881 >Why is it impossible for you to directly answer a question I did answer it, I think you are projecting.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:03:52 2016 No.8500889 >>8500867 >I'm talking creation of art. People at the time who would have otherwise gotten into literature today, were into religion at the time. What do you mean by this?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:06:32 2016 No.8500900 >>8500887 No you didn't. You completely sidestepped the question. I honestly think this worming your way through debate is so unconscious you don't even realise you're doing it. It's sad really.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:06:51 2016 No.8500901 >I have not read The Waves: The Thread

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:07:27 2016 No.8500903

>>8500889
>What do you mean by this?

People at the time who would have otherwise been literate and wrote within the span of the 19th century to now were focusing into religion or art. That's changed. Things are more secular and literature and music can be focused on in equal amount. On top of this, poor women were largely suppressed and the aristocrats found no reason to write, though literate, because they weren't very creative. Even the men. That said within the last 250 years as more became literate, and feminism was fought for, you see an explosion of women's literature. And many are taught today alongside men because it's actually good well regarded material.

Anyone who was educated on literature and its history would know this. But I know you only came to shitpost here and shill.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:08:07 2016 No.8500907 >>8500900 Bro this is literally how women are. This cunt got a double dose, but it's the same with all of em.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:08:29 2016 No.8500908 >>8500900 >No you didn't. You completely sidestepped the question. I honestly think this worming your way through debate is so unconscious you don't even realise you're doing it. It's sad really. How are you not worming your way through this debate

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:09:37 2016 No.8500913 >>8500908 Because I posed a question that pointed out a flaw in your logic in an attempt to debunk your argument. That's how you're supposed to debate.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:09:40 2016 No.8500914 >>8500903 The overwhelming majority of highly regarded art/literature/music was not produced by the uneducated pleb masses. Disproven. Next.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:09:56 2016 No.8500915 >>8500908 We're double teaming the shit out of you ya dumb whore. You're getting completely trashed and every post you make only serves to further embarrass yourself.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:11:16 2016 No.8500922

>>8500913
>Because I posed a question that pointed out a flaw in your logic in an attempt to debunk your argument.

You didn't actually.

>>8500914
>The overwhelming majority of highly regarded art/literature/music was not produced by the uneducated pleb masses

They are.

>>8500915
That's fine because I'm going to continue.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:12:02 2016 No.8500924 >>8500922 >get proven wrong >n-no Like I said, next.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:12:39 2016 No.8500926 >>8500924 You didn't prove me wrong. You just said exactly what you accused me of saying.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:15:09 2016 No.8500932 >>8500922 >you didn't >they are How can a living human being look at these posts and think "yes, that makes sense, I am proving my point". It genuinely terrifies me that you are able to vote, or at least it would if voting was worth a damn.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:17:22 2016 No.8500938 >>8500932 >How can a living human being look at these posts and think "yes, that makes sense, I am proving my point" Because it is around the level of argumentation you're currently practicing. If you want different, than try to shill better.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:17:52 2016 No.8500939 >>8500922 >that's fine, pls continue Damn boys, this bitch is a freak, shes into getting shitfucked sideways, she loves it

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:18:12 2016 No.8500941 >>8500938 Hey, for what it's worth, I'm a guy and I agree with you. You're wasting your time debating with these idiotic shitheads.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:19:28 2016 No.8500943 >>8500941 t. numale cuck

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:20:06 2016 No.8500948 >>8500939 I can take multiple small chodes of poor arguments and shit logic.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:20:11 2016 No.8500949 >>8500449 It's a fairly major factor. Kind of similar to how the vast majority of philosophers were rich, or at the very least middle class.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:21:08 2016 No.8500950 >>8500943 I wonder what you'd say to /lit/ of the past when we could discuss for example, Morrison, without you getting triggered and shilling politically about how the blacks and the women are inferior for weeks on end

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:21:21 2016 No.8500951 >>8500943 To be honest I'd rather let my partner cheat on me than be some bigoted shithead.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:21:21 2016 No.8500952 >>8500948 You wouldn't recognize logic if it shit down your throat

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:22:09 2016 No.8500955 >>8500952 I would actually.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:25:35 2016 No.8500971 >>8500955 Well that's funny because you've had s veritable two girls one cup of logic thrown at you today and have resorted to snarky aspersions on the opponents character, snake like sidestepping and one word dismissals.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:25:36 2016 No.8500972 >>8500955 Clearly not

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:25:44 2016 No.8500973 File: 62 KB, 777x656, 1439596096692.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8500618

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:25:50 2016 No.8500974

I'm not here to argue, I'm not here for a faggot dialogue, just a reminder that testosterone exists and if we look at its effects there should be no surprise that men are disproportionately represented in the top 1% of most disciplines. if more women decided to soak themselves in androgens from puberty onwards, I think we would begin to see more laborious, ambitious 'great book' kinds of works written by women.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:26:19 2016 No.8500978

>>8500449
If you want to claim that, then you are admitting at the same time that women are weak, because many of the greatest artists in the world have struggled through failure after failure to get to where they came.

Im looking at philosophers right now, which is not the same as authors i admit, and most of the greatest minds have come from rich families. Except Plato, he was a poor man.

Oh and for anyone looking at institutional approval/non-approval you know nothing about the power relations inherent in this society and havent been paying attention to how women(jews) have been forcing their way into every nook and cranny of traditionally male society; deserved or not.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:26:44 2016 No.8500980

>>8500971
>Well that's funny because you've had s veritable two girls one cup of logic thrown at you today and have resorted to snarky aspersions on the opponents character, snake like sidestepping and one word dismissals.

If I'm being snarky than what are you being?

>>8500972
I disagree.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:26:48 2016 No.8500981 >>8500971 Lmao

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:28:35 2016 No.8500989 >>8500980 >I disagree So what? Your words are worthless equivocation and drivel.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:29:15 2016 No.8500993 >>8500989 As are yours. Shilling isn't quality.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:29:27 2016 No.8500994
File: 3.20 MB, 420x300, nicememe.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8500974

there's actually a dearth of scientific proof showing that testosterone affects IQ or intellect. gender essentialists need to try harder. if you can't see the condition of women at the hands of men throughout history and draw some connections... you might be a bigot.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:32:51 2016 No.8501003 >>8500994 >Condition of women at hands of men What, you mean valued loved and protected from the ravages of war, the struggles of work, and the dangers of nature? What poor, poor creatures they must be

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:33:40 2016 No.8501007 >>8501003 >What, you mean valued loved and protected from the ravages of war, the struggles of work, and the dangers of nature? I thought you were talking about the rich aristorcrats, not the peasants.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:34:49 2016 No.8501009 >>8501007 We're talkin about a lot of stuff

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:36:46 2016 No.8501013

>>8501009
Right. Like how middle class and rich aristocratic men largely suppressed women's creative abilities and achievements and encouraged religion. Or how poor women had no choice but to put faith in religion instead of otherwise creative abilities they can focus on now.

Which isn't particularly nice actually.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:37:58 2016 No.8501021
File: 160 KB, 343x315, 1470870109654.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8501013

>Women have been discouraged from genres such as sculpture that require studio training or expensive materials. But in philosophy, mathematics, and poetry, the only materials are pen and paper. Male conspiracy cannot explain all female failures. I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant. Genius is not checked by social obstacles: it will overcome. Men's egotism, so disgusting in the talentless, is the source of their greatness as a sex. [...] Even now, with all vocations open, I marvel at the rarity of the woman driven by artistic or intellectual obsession, that self-mutilating derangement of social relationship which, in its alternate forms of crime and ideation, is the disgrace and glory of the human species.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:38:15 2016 No.8501022 >>8501013 Might makes right. Rub some dirt it it, hun

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:39:19 2016 No.8501024 >>8501021 So you quoted Camilla Page. >>8501022 >Might makes right It doesn't anymore, since none of you are particularly mighty.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:41:22 2016 No.8501032

>>8501024

...Yes? I didn't say women are worthless or have worthless ideas, we're just talking about the fact that they're under-represented in the ranks of 'great artists'.

I'm sorry, but it appears that you cannot into logic. You are literally a retard.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:41:36 2016 No.8501033 File: 35 KB, 600x777, 406.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8501024 If women were any good they'd be the ones holding men down. But they're not.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:42:35 2016 No.8501035 >>8500867 Are you cute?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:43:03 2016 No.8501037 >>8501033 obviously it because men strong. that why strongest men always rule. that why leadership determined by wrestle.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:43:27 2016 No.8501038 >>8501033 >If women were any good they'd be the ones holding men down. I would argue something about motherhood, but I think you're right to say your mother failed holding you down

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:44:30 2016 No.8501040 >>8501037 >>8501038 Butthurt

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:45:33 2016 No.8501044 >>8501040 I would argue women are currently holding you down more than you are holding them down.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:48:38 2016 No.8501056 File: 109 KB, 1436x737, butthurt-meter-e1440697649724.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8501044 The fact that you're willing to argue that without knowing me at all says all that needs to be said.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:48:41 2016 No.8501057 File: 158 KB, 589x628, clippybtfo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8501021 >this kills the thread

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:51:52 2016 No.8501068

>>8501056
>The fact that you're willing to argue that without knowing me at all says all that needs to be said.

You've been arguing with me over the legitimacy of discussing literature by women on a board dedicated to literature for over 4 hours I believe.

I don't think I need to know you to know.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:53:38 2016 No.8501072 Do pretty feminine women ever participate in internet fights?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:54:47 2016 No.8501076 >>8501068 Nah I've only been itt an hour. See? You have no idea what's going on. Just accept your place as a second class human already sheesh

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:55:20 2016 No.8501080

>>8500589
>Honestly do you power rank all literature in determining greatness?
It has nothing to do with ranking. There's just stuff that is very intuitive. If I asked you if Tolstoy was better than JK Rowling you could instantly say yes; you don't need to have made a list of greatest books to make a judgment like that.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:55:45 2016 No.8501082 >>8501072 I thought you were bitching about ad homs earlier :o) >>8501076 >Nah I've only been itt an hour. You've been on for more. You didn't need to point out otherwise like you tend to do.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:56:09 2016 No.8501083

>>8501068

LOL THIS IS WHAT WOMEN ACTUALLY BELIEVE

nobody ever said that it was illegitimate to discuss literature by women. just that none of them have written a 'masterpiece' on the level of don quixote, ulysses, hamlet. seriously, the best female novelists are austen and eliot.

stop trying to be oppressed and you might make something out of your life

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:56:47 2016 No.8501084 >>8501080 >If I asked you if Tolstoy was better than JK Rowling you could instantly say yes; you don't need to have made a list of greatest books to make a judgment like that. Comparing Toni Morrison to JK Rowling is very amusing.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:57:41 2016 No.8501086 >>8501082 You're hysterical lady. Really, you've lost it. Take a breather, rub one out, and come back when you're ready to talk like an adult.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:57:50 2016 No.8501087

>>8501083
>just that none of them have written a 'masterpiece' on the level of don quixote, ulysses, hamlet. seriously, the best female novelists are austen and eliot.

Except critically speaking they already have multiple times.

And Ulysses isn't a masterpiece, we need to move past high school and stop putting Joyce on a pedestal.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 14:58:52 2016 No.8501094 >>8501086 You are asking clear adult conversation but you are talking like a sardonic child to his mother.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:00:04 2016 No.8501100 >>8501083 >Unironically considering Ulysses a masterpiece What was your favorite part of it?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:00:17 2016 No.8501101 >>8501094 I would never speak to my mother the way I have to you. She's a good woman. You're shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:00:23 2016 No.8501102 >>8501082 >I thought you were bitching about ad homs earlier :o) Wasn't me. Anyway, I always wanted a female buddy, if you want to be my pen pal let me know. I don't care if you're hot or not.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:00:59 2016 No.8501105 >>8501101 >I would never speak to my mother the way I have to you Probably because she's spoiled you into becoming a neet.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:02:03 2016 No.8501112 >>8501100 Molly blooms soliloquy is one of the most famous and well loved passages in all of literature you steaming pile

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:03:59 2016 No.8501120 File: 91 KB, 843x842, fMuiB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8501087 >And Ulysses isn't a masterpiece, we need to move past high school and stop putting Joyce on a pedestal.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:04:15 2016 No.8501121 File: 25 KB, 400x400, butthurt_400x400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8501105 I work full time

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:05:52 2016 No.8501129 >>8501121 That's what you're doing arguing on /lit/ for over an hour on a work day

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:06:50 2016 No.8501132 Minority men have been oppressed longer and harder than white women ever were and came up with some great art. Bitches ain't shit, unfortunately.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:09:00 2016 No.8501137 >>8501132 That's exactly why I posted a black woman you seemingly don't recognize. You care much about minority literature don't you...

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:11:10 2016 No.8501144 >>8501129 I'm off for a week visiting the family, thanks for your concern

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:11:29 2016 No.8501146 >>8501144 Uh Huh

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:11:40 2016 No.8501147 >>8501137 I responded to the OP, didn't read the thread. I don't mind minorities, I just realise that females are not culturally relevant players. They are the decorative sex.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:12:37 2016 No.8501149 >>8501146 Yeah

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:14:57 2016 No.8501155 >>8501147 >just realise that females are not culturally relevant players And you bitch about muslims lmao. If that's all women are, the men who post on this website are less than worthless and valueless now who squandered their potential .

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:24:17 2016 No.8501189 >>8500589 >Dude, everything is, like, subjective. Slam poetry is the same as Iliad. You never went to an expensive school to get all the right opinions or something?

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:25:00 2016 No.8501190 >>8501189 >>>Dude, everything is, like, subjective. Slam poetry is the same as Iliad. You never went to an expensive school to get all the right opinions or something? That's not what I suggested either.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:25:22 2016 No.8501193 >>8501155 You literally can't read you're so blinded by the stereotype you're imagining youre fighting. The guys first sentence was that he doesn't mind minorities and you try to say he's complaining about Muslims You're fucked up

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:25:54 2016 No.8501195 >>8501120 I want to sniff Rose's toes.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:28:09 2016 No.8501201

>>8501100
>>8501087

you fucking dipshit. jesus fucking christ. just because you haven't actually read ulysses doesn't mean it's just a meme. if you have read it and you still believe what you're saying, you simply shouldn't be commenting on literature, I'm sorry. I'm not going to launch into a defense of Ulysses here, I'm not going to tell you about how the early chapters are the apex of the stream of consciousness trend, I won't talk about his absolute dominance over language and his sense of play, I won't talk about how formal conceits are almost always being used to modulate the content of the chapters, I won't talk about how his views on identity, consumerism, and politics were all shockingly ahead of his time and intricately spun out in brilliantly subtle webs throughout the novel, I won't talk about he interrogates the function of the author more thoroughly than even cervantes, i won't talk about his linguistic inventiveness or the panopticism of his pen, I won't talk about how reading Ulysses trains our powers of textual analysis more than reading any post-hoc critical theory bullshit...

all I want to talk about today is how utterly retarded it is to dismiss Ulysses or suggest that Joyce didn't earn his place in the canon.

your dismissal couldn't be more clearly motivated by politics of resentment and the shame of your own inadequacy. ulysses is a monument of our language and if it had been written by a woman it would be held up as a standard by all feminists.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:29:35 2016 No.8501203 File: 260 KB, 1182x1686, weedisnotweed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] it's that anon and anonette projecting on each other so bad they can't even have a proper discussion episode again.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 15:34:03 2016 No.8501212 >>8501201 Bravo, anon

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:00:36 2016 No.8501282 >>8500555 Or was I?

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:05:29 2016 No.8501295

>>8501201

So let's just ignore its most glaring weakness?? IT HAS NO HUMANITY. Like all great Western doorstoppers it's autistically 'great', like a giant Lego model of a battleship. As for actual aesthetic sensibility, Woolf, Austen, and Eliot all have better claims to his place in the canon.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:08:19 2016 No.8501299 >>8501295 Hilariously wrong. Confirmed for never having read Ulysses

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:17:08 2016 No.8501322

>>8501295
>IT HAS NO HUMANITY.
You're embarrassing yourself. Portrait and Ulysses are two of the most honestly human books of all time. In fact, people who give up on Ulysses often do so because they just see it on a surface level as a story that's so realistic it's boring.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:18:35 2016 No.8501323

>>8501201
Not him, but reading Ulysses as an exercise in prose porn is simply not enjoyable. Those who claim plot and character development are subservient to prose, and that a novel with great prose need not really even have the previous, or as in Ulysses case, are obscured by the prose puzzle, are forgetting the very core of the literary experience: to tell stories. Give me the Chanson de Roland, Macaulay, Shakespeare, Arrian, Oscar Wilde, Philip Roth, but Ulysses is neither fun nor engaging for most to read.

>“And Joyce was a poor sick fucker who probably died with his balls somewhere up around his navel. None of that for me, thanks.” — Hunter S. Thompson, in a letter to Lionel Olay

>“He’s a queasy undergraduate scratching his pimples.” — Virginia Woolf

>“Why don’t you write books people can read?” — Nora Joyce, to her husband.

>“My God, what a clumsy olla putrida James Joyce is! Nothing but old fags and cabbage stumps of quotations from the Bible and the rest stewed in the juice of deliberate, journalistic dirty-mindedness.” — D.H. Lawrence

>“Ulysses could have done with a good editor.” — Roddy Doyle

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:20:48 2016 No.8501332 >>8501112 So is that you favorite part? Middlebrow. >>8501201 It's honestly pretty shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:22:54 2016 No.8501342 >>8501155 >And you bitch about muslims lmao. Where did you get that, miss?

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 16:57:41 2016 No.8501485
File: 95 KB, 233x255, 1470873291725.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8501323
>>8501332

All I can say is that you people have a smaller view of literature than others. I'm not saying it's a bad thing... It's like this:

>Now even bookish pharmacists are afraid to take on the great, imperfect, torrential works, books that blaze paths into the unknown. They choose the perfect exercises of the great masters. Or what amounts to the same thing: they want to watch the great masters spar, but they have no interest in real combat, when the great masters struggle against that something, that something that terrifies us all, that something that cows us and spurs us on, amid blood and mortal wounds and stench.

(from 2666)

In Longinus' "On Sublimity", he argues that we need to forgive the faults of genius if they are able even ever so rarely to hit upon the sublime. Ulysses does this. It may take more study and time than you're willing to commit, but it is possible to detect "the echo of a noble mind" throughout the book. It may not be pretty and fun to read from front to back, it might not fulfill your standard expectations for literature at all, but I'll argue to the death that it's the single most great and necessary work in English of the last two centuries.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 17:10:32 2016 No.8501522

>>8501485
For me Joyce is the Jackson Pollock of literature. I've tried to appreciate it, I know plenty of people whom I respect believe him to be the chosen one, I can even appreciate some their sensibilities of style.

But I cannot enjoy them. I'd rather Bruegel the Elder and Melville.

Anonymous Mon Sep 12 17:24:40 2016 No.8501557

>>8501522
>For me Joyce is the Jackson Pollock of literature
This hurts me, anon. I understand what you are saying but Joyce is not like Pollock at all; being unable to appreciate Joyce would be more akin to being unable to appreciate jazz because there is a certain undeniable level of technical proficiency, even if you do get it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 17:27:23 2016 No.8501561 >>8501557 just read dubliners and pomes penyeach if you need proof of this. not that they're best poems and short stories of the era, but they do put on display an obviously high degree of classical aesthetic craftsmanship.

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 17:53:35 2016 No.8501615 >>8501522 You know nothing of Joyce nor Pollock

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 17:54:30 2016 No.8501617 File: 113 KB, 1269x398, lit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 17:56:19 2016 No.8501621 >>8501617 >let's only focus on the ugly attacks and weakest arguments of the opposition so we aren't exposed as frauds feminists, everyone

>>	Anonymous Mon Sep 12 19:26:13 2016 No.8501931 >>8501617 he is right you know

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 02:27:28 2016 No.8503195 Why has this board become so bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 03:11:25 2016 No.8503265 >>8501617 >anon telling it how it is brilliant

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 03:15:38 2016 No.8503270 >>8500449 Yes. Also, in Japan they did (Genji is girls).

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 03:17:06 2016 No.8503273 Only reason people write masterpieces is to get laid. Only men and lesbians have trouble getting laid, hence why they write most of the masterpieces.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 03:21:10 2016 No.8503280 File: 143 KB, 1200x1200, aaaaaa.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] yes or no

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 03:33:58 2016 No.8503292 Genji Monogatari

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 13:21:23 2016 No.8504372 if you claim to be a feminist and argue that women haven't written any masterpieces because of some male conspiracy, then are you not tacitly agreeing to the starting point that existing fiction written by women are NOT masterpieces?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 13:25:59 2016 No.8504390 DESU Frankenstein is one of my favorite books but her husband may have helped her out so I don't know how much credit she deserves.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 13:26:10 2016 No.8504391 >>8504372 this is an objective fact though

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 13:32:18 2016 No.8504407 >>8500449 But women did write masterpieces before the 20th century.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 13:38:42 2016 No.8504437 >>8503273 why are fags so good at lit then when they're hypersexual and always have a dick to suck/

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 13:43:35 2016 No.8504448 have you fucking retards ever read The Bell Jar like /thread

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 19:51:38 2016 No.8505796 >>8500463 jane eyre is shit

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 19:55:46 2016 No.8505803 >>8501295 looooool

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 19:56:51 2016 No.8505807 >>8500584 >implying you've read Ulysses Posers need to gtfo /lit/

Anonymous Tue Sep 13 19:58:37 2016 No.8505811
File: 44 KB, 476x476, 1472310772523.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8505807

>I am incapable of finishing Ulysses, therefore everyone else is lying when they claim to have read it

this is one of the most retarded recurrent statements i see whenever anybody mentions ulysses on this board, and all it ever does is give away the fact that anon is basically illiterate

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:02:42 2016 No.8505819 >>8500449 Why do you even makethreafs like these?They always descend into shit

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:04:29 2016 No.8505829 >>8505819 Back in the day we did things for the lulz Nowadays though, it's all about the (yous)

Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:05:40 2016 No.8505836

>>8505811
>implying
I have read Ulysses. I am not retarded enough to believe that a bunch of 4chan posters making shitty meme posts about women writers or what works are best. Only an idiot would deny that a bunch of wannabe pseuds come here, find out what is considered "patrician" and then pretend they've read it. I know for a fact you haven't read it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:09:09 2016 No.8505845 why is it that the people who read masterpieces are so bad at writing?

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:10:26 2016 No.8505852 >>8505836 Worst post itt

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:12:54 2016 No.8505860 >>8505852 >>>/tv/

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:13:54 2016 No.8505865 i avoid women authors because I think my time would be better spent reading all the great male authors i haven't got to yet. Right now I'm reading Decline & Fall by Gibbon.

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:17:07 2016 No.8505878 >>8500449 This logic can be disproven because black people have wrote masterpieces

>>	Anonymous Tue Sep 13 20:18:33 2016 No.8505881 >>8505878 >have wrote

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature