Why is there a huge disconnect / blind spot / willful ignorance

File: 7948372.png (26KB, 345x504px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 345x504px

Why is there a huge disconnect / blind spot / willful ignorance over literature as "objectively judged art" and literature as "part of the entertainment industry" and / or as completely subjective in quality? I think it's because of pseudo intellectual and pretentious posturing from the people on this board.

You pretend that literature is the former when it is the latter. You use the endorsement stamp of a large enough publisher as a sign of minimum quality even though we live in the age of the internet, which allows a huge diversity in the types of content available to read and their distribution. You're lucky that you were born a long time after the invention of the printing press, otherwise your "bar for art" would have to be explained within the context of a previous disruptive technology that you blindly accept.

I think the NEET caricature annoys this board a lot. /lit/ tries to portray reading as a worthwhile and enriching end in itself, yet the extreme version of the "reader" (ignoring anyone who was born rich) is seen with disgust and disrespect. Getting /lit/ to admit that going outside to learn about the human condition is a valid strategy is tricky and I don't think that I have ever managed it.

I could go on but I'll end now by mentioning how I think seeing the worship of the academia-media-publishing industrial complex on this board mainly reminds me of Steinbeck's quote about Americans being millionaires temporarily down on their luck. /lit/ is desperate for the industry's stamp of approval, and associates it with the works of the Western Canon (ironically including books such as The Republic) even as it is responsible for the horrific YA and alt-lit / Mira-Tao trends.