>>7641972 I unfortunetlly live in Poland and it's so hard to get good translations of his works... Manfred, Cain, Heaven and Earth checked. Cain is my number one at this moment. I'm going to library tomorrow and I hope I will get Don Juan.
>>7641972 >t Byron knew how to convey feelings and sensations through rhythm and sounds. So did Coleridge. Haven't you read an obscure little poem by the name of Kublai Khan? Most pre-modernist poets had this talent, in fact. Pope had it, so did most of the romatnics, Emerson and Whitman had it, Tennyson certainly had it, Housman and Swinburne had it. Hell, even Robert Frost exhibits it from time to time.
>>7641996 Ya this. He isn't actually remembered because he's a great writer. He's remember for the same reason Tao Lin will probably be remembered (and likely the same reason Tao will go down in history as good writer): he was a celebrity who publicized his stuff really well. He was a meme who got famous for giving dumb prissy English aristocratic girls wet panties.
Guess what guis: art history isn't some objective thing. Some of these guys are just hacks who knew the right people, and after a few generations of people like /lit/izens liking things because they were told it was good rather than actually liking it, culture starts to confuse the two.
tao "fucked mira's slimy pussy" lin has no talent whatsoever
I don't think you fully appreciate how difficult and rare it is to write a masterpiece (if you are indeed agreeing with the post you responded to). Eliot wrote one masterpiece, Whitman wrote a few, Stevens has one or two. Implying that Byron was a "hack" is downright ignorant.
>>7642364 >tao "fucked mira's slimy pussy" lin has no talent whatsoever I don't think you know how cultural history is actually made. There's definitely a stronger filter for quality than most communities but ffs for the most part, what gets popular among art people is as objective as what gets popular anywhere else. Don't underestimate how much communities trim and coaxed their populations, in some ways arbitrarily and in some ways deliberately, until they narrow down who gets remembered.
>>7642403 Also Tao probably will be remembered. That's how this works desu. He knows the right people and he managed to gain enough momentum that enough people know him now that he'll be remembered in the next generation as a contributor to our generations literature, and a few generations down the line, people will stop remembering that he was crap.
Ffs dude you seem to unironically believe in quality. There is no "good" anymore than there's a think such as "truth". There's texts that cohere with a body of literature, a society's ideology, a certain portion of its population's inner lives, etc. But "good", much less "masterpiece", is a figment perpetuated by school marms.
And that's exactly why a guy like Tao can end up being thought of as "good" - once his work is read enough that it's integrated in the set of texts that form a reference point for literature, he'll automatically be "good" because that's what "good" is, if it can be anything at all.
>>7642433 >Tao is a non entity but you get all your "knowledge" from /lit/ so he seems like a Big Deal to you. I don't. In fact I barely go on here.
Also I'm probably much better educated than you. I don't know you, but given what I know about myself and what I know about you from this thread, I'd bet a lot of money I'm substantially better educated than you.
>>7642423 >There is no "good" anymore than there's a think such as "truth" keep telling yourself that you'll make it one day because no one will be able to discern how bad you are >"masterpiece", is a figment perpetuated by school marms This is unsurprising coming from a guy defending tao lin >once his work is read enough that it's integrated in the set of texts that form a reference point for literature, he'll automatically be "good" because that's what "good" is Nothing is automatic, all the beats are trash (except maybe Kerouac), fewer people read Lowell, no one reads Musil, no one remembers Roethke or Koestler. >Also I'm probably much better educated than you and my dad works for nintendo
Just because you lack standards doesn't mean the rest of us do
>>7642455 >>7642463 >>7642473 >>7642491 If any of you were smart you would have pointed out the irony of someone who claimed there was no such thing as truth also claiming to be unambiguously right about something.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.