/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13946016]

Imagine the combined forces of all 19-20th century atheistic postmodernist existentialist french faggots being completely and utterly BTFO by the work of one man

[Anonymous No.13946039]

If he actually think he's got anything insightful to say you need to get your brain checked lmao. Dude is a fucking brainlet.

[Anonymous No.13946052]

>>13946039
>try to imagine being this low-testosterone to practice empathy
>i literally can't

[Anonymous No.13946111]

>>13946039
>Cambridge alumnus
>Has written about many different topics
>Got personally involved in political dissidence
>Not affraid of denouncing the degeneracy of modern art
>Not a radical goofball with outlandish ideas

[Anonymous No.13946123]

>>13946111
based

[Anonymous No.13946190]

>>13946111
trips of truth. Scruton is based. Fuck fags and commiescum

[Anonymous No.13946198]

>>13946016
OP here, I posted the wrong picture

[Anonymous No.13946359]

>>13946198
nice try. I didn't mention marxists (but they are btfo too)

[Anonymous No.13946392]

>>13946039
Correct. I remember watching a full hour tv propaganda program of his on youtube. The title initially intrigued me, was something along the lines of 'where has beauty gone' (meaning in the 20th century). Scruton proceeded the following hour to deploy baseless rants against modernism, really anything in art, architecture, music et al. that had been invented after 1900. At one point he spent several minutes pacing around some mediocre 70s municipal building located in London, if I recall correctly, and decrying its alleged ugliness. The thing was not beautiful by any means, but judging from how its mere existence triggered the guy, I kept thinking they must have demolished his childhood home to erect the thing. Not very convincing, too emotional, too agitated.
I just cant' take guys like this seriously anymore. Not when artists like pic related have existed and created during this period.

[Anonymous No.13946403]

>>13946392
Adding to this post: Here's the yt video I am referring to. Don't watch it for informative or entertainment value, it's very underwhelming, only watch it to get what I'm talking about concerning Scruton.

[Anonymous No.13946413]

>>13946403
Godd dayum, forgot the link again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHw4MMEnmpc

[Anonymous No.13947281]

>>13946413
That's a BBC doc directed at the lowest common denominator trying to get english NPCs to embrace traditional values with an emotional appeal. It has to be shitty to have mass appeal and is bound to have a dozen producers with their fingers in it fucking things up. His actual writing is much more coherent and thoughtful.

[Anonymous No.13947504]

>>13946392
>>13946403
>>13946413
That documentary was perhaps the best thing Scruton ever did in terms of public appeal and fame, but probably the worst one in terms of intellectual respect. The quality of the reasoning is low. In fact, it's an emotional statement, not a piece of argumentative philosophy.

Anyway, you should actually read him if you wish to know the man's idea. You will find out that he not only likes modern art, but is a great admirer of some of the major modern artists (T.S. Eliot is his biggest influence), besides being a modern composer and novelist himself. He probably likes jazz, and has written favorably on Elvis and The Beatles, and even Metallica. This is a quote from him:

>"I have actually been listening to quite a bit of heavy metal lately, and Metallica, I think, is genuinely talented. Master of Puppets I think has got something genuinely both poetic – violently poetic – and musical. Every now and then something like that stands out"

But I agree that the documentary made him look much more conservative than what he actually is. Probably because he focused on modern architecture which, indeed, is the worst thing to have come into existence (although he even then he allows for some exceptions, like Loyd Wright, but he notes that these architects usually built for the rich, while the poor remained condemned to live in concrete boxes).

[Anonymous No.13947519]

>>13947281
It must also be noted that the documentary worked.

It has nearly a million views and the like/dislike rate is 27.360 vs. 568. He did get his message across.

His second most viewed YT video has a little more than half the number of views of Beauty, and it's just five minutes long. The third one has Peterson in it. The other ones are all bellow 300 thousand.

[Anonymous No.13947526]

>>13947504
Huh?

[Anonymous No.13947544]

>>13946392
wew lad. i bet you drive a prius.

[Anonymous No.13947549]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBesqSRBoo

This is a better documentary to get you introduced to Roger Scruton. It's for a more sophisticated audience.

The tango in the intro was composed by him, by the way.

[Anonymous No.13947573]

>>13946016
I like Scruton a lot, and I've read a lot of his shit, but this isn't remotely true.

[Anonymous No.13947579]

>>13947504
>modern architecture which, indeed, is the worst thing to have come into existence
Lol, listen to yourself. Pure parroting of ideology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGwVAxRHxgM&t=228s

[Anonymous No.13947581]

>>13947549
By the way, it's more of an introduction to the man and his overall sensibilities than to his philosophy.

If you want his philosophy, you have to read his books. Fools, Fires and Firebrands is a pretty good place to start, if you want to know his more polemical side. The Meaning of Conservatism is an excellent introduction to what conservatism actually is (it's not a philosophy book, but a doctrinal one, i.e., an expository treatise made to dispel confusions, and for this reason very useful). How to Be a Conservative, on the other hand, is more like traditional argumentative prose.

He also has treatises on the aesthetics of architecture, some books on music, Richard Wagner, sexual desire, and other matters.

[Anonymous No.13947590]

>>13946016
I think you mean Guénon

[Anonymous No.13947595]

>>13947579
It has nothing to do with ideology.

I won't watch the video, because I have little time and have heard enough arguments for modern architecture already, but anyone can make a case for anything. Also, just keep in mind that there's no one making a case for the Chartres Cathedral, because it doesn't need one.

[Anonymous No.13947598]

>>13947579
The (bad) argument @ timestamp in the 6-minute video you posted is refuted just by at the fucking images in the video. The buildings are fucking hideous. You don't need an ideology to see that.

[Anonymous No.13947606]

>>13947595
>keep in mind that there's no one making a case for the Chartres Cathedral, because it doesn't need one.
Absolutely fucking based

[Anonymous No.13947612]

>>13947590
>he doesn't know

[Anonymous No.13947616]

>>13947581
don't forget this. in some ways it's the ultimate Scruton: informative, well argued, fair, learned, and periodically every few pages he throws something totally unexpected at you that makes you think "tf is he saying this for? that's not fair, is it?"

[Anonymous No.13947638]

>>13947616
I haven't read that one yet!

[Anonymous No.13947644]

>>13947504
>>13947519
>many people think it gud, dis mean that it actually gud
Isn't this the precise attitude whence this guy sees all the alleged cultural and spiritual ills originating in.

[Anonymous No.13947703]

>>13947644
Why is interpreting a piece of simple text so difficult for you?

>>many people think it gud, dis mean that it actually gud

I never said that. I said that *his goal* with that documentary was to spread a message to a large number of people, and he succeeded in it.

That does not mean he is good any more than it means Zizek is good for having achieved the very same thing.

Scruton is good because he wrote well-argued, well-researched books which very few people bother to read from cover to cover.

[Anonymous No.13947706]

I've only read this as an early arch student looking for somebody to decry new developments and it was complete and utter trash. There are much better conservative art/architecture writers than this idiot

[Anonymous No.13947736]

>>13947706
That's OK. Which ones do you recommend?

[Anonymous No.13947752]

>>13947581
>Wagner
Most overrated classical composer of all time. Listened to a condensed version (~80mins) of Ring der Nibelungen once (I know, but the whole thing is a multi hour opera I can't be bothered to allocate actual attention to). Had to keep myself from laughing right from the start - the ouverture, 5 mins of swelling horns playing one ruminous, tedious, unimaginative, simply bland chord. So this is supposed to be the genius of romanticism, the supposed wizard of chromatic harmony? I laugh. I'm guessing it was supposed to symbolize a deep silence on a battlefield, right before a blood-filled battle, some germans in the wild with ram horns and loincloths clubbing each other's heads in (pic related). Just primitive music, with a lot of pretension. I personally aven't really gotten around to a detailed examination of Nietzsche myself, but from what I've gathered on his late opinion on Wagner, I'd have to agree.

[Anonymous No.13947762]

>>13947595
>Also, just keep in mind that there's no one making a case for the Chartres Cathedral, because it doesn't need one.

Absolutely right. This is Scruton's point, that what is beautiful has both an intrinsic and communal assignment. Brutalist architecture, seen from a particular perspective, can be beautiful, but they are not easily beautiful. Great works of literature can be afforded this privilege, but architecture defines the landscape of a city and a nation, it should have a general thematic unity, should be well-composed not jarring. Some beauty is exoteric, it can be comprehended by most on first viewing. Other beauty is esoteric, can only be understood after study, and through 'appreciation' which is the product of that study. For a city to be thematically disharmonious and esoterically beautiful is much the same as its being ugly, at least for the majority.

The second problem is that the esoteric is the esoteric, meaning that it isn't easily mastered. Whilst the best brutalist works might be genuinely appreciable masterpieces, it is far easier for them to be awful. Since the criteria for its beauty is not practical mastery and skill (as it was for classical architecture) but rather learning or an idea, an abstraction, it can be very easily bungled in an Emperor's-New-Clothes way that the classical cannot.

[Anonymous No.13947770]

>>13947703
Then why does he feel the need to rely on embarassing agitprop pieces such as said BBC documentary? What do I care if Scruton needs to appeal to the uneducated masses? I have to judge what I see from him. Seems more like the strategy of a tv scientist like Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Like the guy as a communicator, but I couldn't give less of a shit about his scientific papers and theses, if he is still active in that regard.

[Anonymous No.13947783]

>>13946111
>404 arguments not found

[Anonymous No.13947784]

>>13947752
>Listened to the condensed version ~80mins) of Ring der Nibelungen once (I know, but the whole thing is a multi hour opera I can't be bothered to allocate actual attention to)
>I personally aven't really gotten around to a detailed examination of Nietzsche myself, but from what I've gathered

I always enjoy how these sorts are post are prefaced by an acknowledgement of ignorance, which is then promptly steamrolled by pure syphilitic arrogance, without a moment's realization. A bi-cameral mind.

[Anonymous No.13947798]

>>13947752
based

[Anonymous No.13947802]

>>13947752
>Most overrated classical composer of all time
*ahem*

[Anonymous No.13947816]

>>13947802
fuck you whore

[Anonymous No.13947827]

>>13947802
obvious bait, but still.... anon.., I... do you believe in nothing? Nothing at all?

[Anonymous No.13947836]

>>13947752
Oy Vey

[Anonymous No.13947847]

>>13947816
>>13947827
bach was a hack. even the russian composers btfo him.

[Anonymous No.13947854]

>>13947784
>A bi-cameral mind.
You're saying that as if it were a bad thing. It is a necessity of modern life, as the more introspect among us, whom you obviously don't belong to, have long realised. But rest assured, I don't compartmentalize music and arts - I try however to do so between my own little inner life of the mind and, in contrast, the drudgery of work life. It has become a necessary virtue.
So your counter argument was...?

[Anonymous No.13947870]

>>13947752
Wagner is one of my favorite composers. Maybe it's just not for you.

>Listened to a condensed version (~80mins) of Ring der Nibelungen once

My God.

>Just primitive music

Jesus, Jesus. That was the most innovative music at the time. Not the Ring per se - although that too, to some extent - but mostly Tristan and Isolde.

You have zero knowledge of the history of music.

[Anonymous No.13947874]

>>13947836
So predictable it's funny. Did someone violate the integrity of your valhalla basedboy? Cry me a river. No, I'm not jewish.
>>13947847
Stop posting

[Anonymous No.13947881]

>>13947770
>I have to judge what I see from him

You can refrain from judging him, and that's the best thing you can do about an author whose books you haven't read.

[Anonymous No.13947900]

>>13947870
>My God.
Oh Come on already. I will admit that the intricacies of narrative arcs might have eluded me. I can still judge technique, the harmonic palette used.
I never listened to Tristan and Isolde, but rest open-minded. Mind throwing me a link to an appetizer excerpt on youtube? Based on our exchange, if you had to make me curious about Wagner after all, what excerpt would you pick?

[Anonymous No.13947907]

>>13947874
bach is either stuffy NPR-tier pseudery or literal boomer-tier rock and roll. you can literally hear society beginning to decay when you listen to his pieces.

[Anonymous No.13947955]

>>13947900
https://www.amazon.com/History-Western-Music-Ninth/dp/0393918297

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGAKgoclJ6A

[Anonymous No.13947978]

>>13947900
If you're being honest, though, some 'excerpts' that people usually enjoy are the overture to the Fliegende Hollander, the Tannhauser overture, O Du Mein Holder Abendstern, Tristan overture, Liebestod, Ride of the Valkyries, and more.

You might continue to dislike him, and that's not a problem, but to call him overrated is a joke. His influence alone is too enormous for him to be considered overrated. He is the single most important composer since Beethoven - perhaps alongside Schoenberg, but even Schoenberg would have been impossible without Wagner, and, if he had never existed, some other person would have had to *have been* Schoenberg after Wagner, a fact which was recognized by Schoenberg himself, though he didn't say it in these terms.

[Anonymous No.13948037]

>>13947978
yeah, he's way better than bach.

[Anonymous No.13948078]

>>13947874
Sorry, Oy Vey is the short version. Here's the full version:

"Oy Vey The anti semites are liking Wagner again Gideon. What will we do?"

"Our secret weapon. Use Pilpul Shlomo. Wordy rhetorical debunking that makes us sound expert. They goyim cannot be allowed to enjoy their music. Claim it is boring. Claim it sounds bad. By G_D you can claim its anti semitic if you like but just make sure you sound like you know what you're talking about and retain a hollow smug superiority"

[Anonymous No.13948117]

>>13948078
good work moishe!

[Anonymous No.13948288]

>>13946016
Based Scrutonposter

[Anonymous No.13948672]

>>13946111
name 1 good book that he's written

[Anonymous No.13948708]

>>13948672
>>13947581

[Anonymous No.13948718]

>>13947581
>Fools, Fires and Firebrands
what's it about? sounds too one dimensional desu

[Anonymous No.13948758]

>>13947579
Making architecture because of politics instead of beauty is retarded. The bourgeois like beautiful things so lets make it fucking disgusting so they would never enjoy it.

[Anonymous No.13948765]

>>13947549
I watched this a long time ago and his arguments for god were really dumb. The interviewer kept throwing questions at him that made him look stupid.

[Anonymous No.13948773]

>>13947736
>>13947706
Not him but are you gonna respond?

[Anonymous No.13949247]

>>13948773
No

[Anonymous No.13949251]

>>13947802
mein gott you have to get a good taste about music
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23yNGer9Wqs

[Anonymous No.13949262]

He's a literal and proven shill. Why would I listen to this guy?

[Anonymous No.13949268]

>>13946016
>hurr if you want to change the current society that means you are a leftist
He's literally retarded. The only reason people take him seriously is his privately educated accent and manner of speaking.

[Anonymous No.13949277]

>>13949247
Cause he is the best and you have no one else.

[Anonymous No.13949291]

>>13946016
Imagine thinking it takes intelligence to critique modern art and architecture. Everybody knows it's utter shit. Just look at it. It refutes itself.

[Anonymous No.13949299]

>>13949291
All of academia and anyone with actual power thinks modern art is good.

[Anonymous No.13949314]

>>13947752
based

Imagine letting your brain get obese by gobbling the biggest turds of teutonic autism known to man.

This post was brought to you by Rameau Gang.

[Anonymous No.13949318]

sir scrotum lol

[Anonymous No.13949344]

>>13949318
Utterly BTFO lmao

[Anonymous No.13949423]

I'm sorry, but I'm never going to take a philosopher who tries to justify needless animal suffering and slaughter seriously. He's really not that thoughtful of a man.
By the way, I do eat meat. If you think that's inconsistent with what I just said, think harder.

[Anonymous No.13949439]

>>13949423
Hunting animals is bad but killing them for consumption is some how different.

[Anonymous No.13949455]

>>13949439
Consuming them != killing them for consumption. Whether or not I eat meat will not change the number of animals killed in any way. A massive change is needed. Preferably legislative action.

[Anonymous No.13949462]

>>13949423
He doesn't though, Scruton is an opponent of factory farming (for instance).

[Anonymous No.13949465]

>>13946016
wtf? I want to start smoking again.

[Anonymous No.13949474]

>>13949455
You don't think if half the population decided to stop consuming meat the number of animals being killed would be less? Also even if it doesn't change the number because a single person decided to eat meat it's still being consistent with your ethical beliefs and personally not consuming the meat of a living being.

> A massive change is needed. Preferably legislative action.
So you are in agreement there isn't a good ethical justification for eating meat.

[Anonymous No.13949516]

>>13949423
Scruton is probably more moral than you when it comes to animals.

He kills foxes, which is not very immoral, because it's pretty fast and anyway they're used to running away from things, so the only really exceptional harm that occurs to them is the bullet (or dog bite? I don't know), but they don't feel it for long.

However, he probably doesn't eat the same processed meat as you do. He's fully in favor of small, conservative farming, as opposed to factory farming. Traditional farming is just like hunting: the animals live freely, and then you kill them.

In factor farming, however, they can spend years and years being slowly tortured, and *this* is the truly great harm. If you eat processed, Americanized meat, then you almost certainly create greater harm to animals than Scruton ever did.

[Anonymous No.13949553]

>>13949516
>He kills foxes, which is not very immoral, because it's pretty fast and anyway they're used to running away from things, so the only really exceptional harm that occurs to them is the bullet (or dog bite? I don't know), but they don't feel it for long.
Would killing humans for sport be justified because they don't feel it very long and they run away?
> the animals live freely, and then you kill them.
Would you be fine with this happening to yourself? We should take good care of you.

[Anonymous No.13949562]

>>13949553
The main difference is that humans have the concept of future.

>Would you be fine with this happening to yourself? We should take good care of you.

No, because I have the concept of future.

By the way, I am not in favor of fox-hunting, I am merely stating the fact that it's less harmful to animals than eating meat in a contemporary industrial society (which Scruton, as far as I know, does not do).

I don't know you, but, if you are like the average Western citizen, you are probably worse to animals than Scruton is, unless you live near a farm. This is merely a fact.

[Anonymous No.13949567]

>>13949562
>The main difference is that humans have the concept of future.
Elaborate please.

[Anonymous No.13949582]

>>13947802
no one actually believes this, not even you
Bach is very much appropriately "rated"

[Anonymous No.13949589]

>>13949567
I have a preference: I wish to live for many years in order to fulfill my dreams. If you kill me, you are doing this completely without my consent, because I have a wish to live for many years, and therefore the act is wrong.

Animals have no wish to live for many years. They just want to live *now*. They have no concept of future. If you put a gun into a cow's head and kill her instantly, no harm will have been done, because no preference, no dream of hers will have been shattered, and she will have suffered no pain/fear either.

[Anonymous No.13949612]

>>13947595
>there's no one making a case for the Chartres Cathedral, because it doesn't need one
BTFO

[Anonymous No.13949634]

>>13949589
What about a young child or disabled person with no concept of future? What about an old person near the end of their life?

[Anonymous No.13949641]

>>13946111
checked
commiefucks btfo

[Anonymous No.13949650]

>>13949268
lol he's not privately educated and he doesn't have an upperclass accent you mong.

[Anonymous No.13949663]

>>13949634
Not him, but both examples still have the potentiality of a wishing, consciius will.

[Anonymous No.13949678]

>>13949663
A disabled person has no potential so you would be okay with killing and eating them right?

[Anonymous No.13949704]

>>13946392
>leftie bitching about emotions
>whole movement is emotions
>posts nigmotion music

[Anonymous No.13949725]

>>13947504
What are his actual arguments? And what books are best?