What does /lit/ think of naturalism and realism?

Naturalism<<<<<Realism<Modernism.

(actually I don't have an opinion, I just wanted to bump)

>>7324658
Its depressing.

>>7324658
>realism
>look at me, I'm a perfectly normal person doing normal things. i might deviate slightly from the norm, but my story's being told thousands of times over. now read about it for thousands of dense, glacially-paced pages.

>naturalism
>holy fuck! look at how dirty and miserable those labourers are! their lives are a document of their era. now read about it for thousands of dense, glacially-paced pages.

Also, there's a dried wine stain glimmering in a beam of afternoon sunlight on an oak wood table somewhere in there.

>>7324658
>unnecessary "ism"s

You know, this is quite like when critics make up silly new genres for music.

Ayn Rand BTFOs it in the Romantic Manifesto.

>>7324955
>Also, there's a dried wine stain glimmering in a beam of afternoon sunlight on an oak wood table somewhere in there.
Underrated post.

>>7324658
>What does /lit/ think of naturalism and realism?
It's hardly Art is it.

>>7324658
You came to the wrong neighbourhood, we're decadents here.

>>7324955
Dubs confirm, however, lets be honest, there are people who are able to write realism exceptionally well even if you personally might dislike the aesthetic.

For example, Stoner.

>>7325074
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_realism
http://www.online-literature.com/periods/naturalism.php

>>7324955
Accurate but its mutch better than glorification about irrelevant things that add nothing but useless compliments to non alive things.

Is it anti-escapism?