Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 1458348839012.png (77KB, 542x535px) Image search:
[Google]
77KB, 542x535px
>read article gushing about a celebrity / cultural figure / work of art referencing both high culture and low culture
So this is just people admitting that the ascetism of avoiding brainless stuff is too much for them, right? And that all the claims of artistic worth of boring high brow stuff were just marketing gimmicks, right?
Also have you realised that "lowbrow" stuff usually serves the reader by entertaining them while high brow stuff is usually self indulgent as fuck confessional stuff? I'm srs, it seems like literally every high brow novel is the author's barely disguised experiences and memories repackaged in to a story.
>>
Why are you still drawing lines about "high" and "low" istead of evaluating each work on its merits?
>>
>>7828110
That's if you are lucky enough to find a story, a plot, or something to make you continue reading beyond the author's own self-satisfaction.
I read Hunger, by Knut Hamsun a couple of months ago, and there was nothing except the character's madness that made the book entertaining.
Literary fiction is the only genre where the author needn't research anything: his own self-reliance and hubris are enough to make his own sail swell, and swell those of the readers who feel smug enough reading such fiction.
It's bourgeois. Therefore it's hip, and cool, and Patrician. This posing is killing the world.
>>
>>7828117
Merit is a spook.
>>
>>7828110
I think it's actually more due to a kind of reverence for authenticity which intellectuals assume is present in lower class people because those are the ones they least identify with and they hate themselves.
Thread posts: 6
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1