Zeitgeist?

>>8319791
Extreme narcissism. One's self-relation and (if it even matters anymore) relation to others, is mediated by idealized self-images on social media

>>8319798
This is definitely true, but I mean, you have the opposite as well, like us right here on this website where everything is submerged in a very deliberate anonymity.

>>8319798
This tbqh.

>>8319829
Any big enough movement or trend spawns a counter movement, the question is if the counter movement can gain enough momentum to leave it's own mark on history.

>>8319829
>>8319849
>We are special snowflakes too!!

kek

>>8319854
My point was the exact opposite, really. True, I didn't include an answer to my own question.
We are a very niche group compared to the vast amounts of social media users.

>>8319854
It's more to do with the fact that of course we here on a website that fetishizes anonymity so much will hold the narcissism of social media to be the defining problem of the age. Just a call to examine our biases no need to be cranky senpai

>>8319859
you derive your very special snowflake identity in a similar way to the 'evil normies'

>>8319874
I don't get what you're trying to say. Maybe if you could stop making assumptions and stop talking in memes..

>>8319877
You're stupid

>>8319886
>if you don't understand my retarded infantile drivel you must be lacking in intelligence

>>8319877
Not the anon you're replying to, but i think they're right when they say that 4chan anonymity isn't some kind of miracle cure for social media narcissism, and implies the same kind of (like the first post said) "idealized self-image", albeit in an inverse way and more subtly constructed

>>8319791
note that zeistgeisty trends are always at least a bit localized, i.e. the 60s in the US was dominated by the Vietnam War while in France there was the Algerian War, in Germany a revolt against the remainders of nazi culture/people in the institutions and so on.

I think in the west "the now" is charecterized by a capitalist system that shows its flaws and fails to progress in order to deal with multinational/global challenges (environmental issues, refugees and so on).

This leads to two movements:
Firstly we have the people who don't want to deal with this complicated stuff, who only care about their own life. This is by many perceived as narcissistic and selfish.

Secondly, people who feel an obligation to tackle the problems but ultimately fail to do so on their own. You have a lot of idealistic people who have become cynics/pessimists. True enthusiasm about achieving a better world order is rarely seen (esp if you compare it to the 90s, the 50s and other times of wide spread optimism).

Another big theme is the decline of the last Superpower America, a country that (contrary to the previous superpowers Britain and France) was catapulted into Superpower status in just a couple of decades and that has never really experienced a decline.

>>8319901
I dunno man, pessimism, cynicism and nihilism seem pretty 20th century to me. Are you saying you see that trend continuing into the future?

>>8319916
like I said, it depends a bit on where you live. Cynicism and pessimism is something which I clearly see as dominating factors right now - look at the rise of the authoritatian right in the west. They are mostly elected by the uninformed and the selfish. I feel that rise is met with cynicism by the others. At least that's how it is in Europe. Trump is probably more devisive and "easier to hate".

Also note cynicism has nothing to do with nihilism. The cynic often has ideals and wants progress but thinks that it is not achievable.

>>8319798
My reactionary response to this development is that I think I'm better than the common person, and I can't decide whether that's ok (whatever that means) or not. I look down on the average person for their ignorance and lack of intelligence, but, perhaps instinctively, I feel bad about it, despite the fact that I have empirical proof that I am "smarter" than 99.9+% of people.

I know this is going to come off as a typical Notes from Underground-esque, "No I'm different, trust me!" post, but it's just something that is always on my mind now.

>>8319956
>'I identify as a reactionary!'

>>8319954
You're right about nihilism. It's incorrect to group the three together.
I think, looking back at the last century, you have the contrast between the general optimism of the public in the west, and the pessimism of the literary establishment, which doesn't reflect this optimism at all. I can't think of any writers in the 20th century who didn't have some kind of pervasive nihilism (and I'm using the word lightly, not to mean completely lacking beliefs but having a kind of irreverence towards the idea of having ideals, like Joyce's scorn for both sides of the nationalism debate in Ireland and the pervasiveness of satire in postmodern literature) and cynicism throughout their work.
I guess what's changed is that this cynicism and "nihilism" (for lack of a better word) which was once a counter-cultural element within literature has become general across the whole population, at least in westernized societies. The question, I think, is whether literature has a duty to react against this current (since, I think there is something in the idea that literature has to be in some way counter-cultural in order to progress, like a kind of dialectical thing, y'know)

>>8319956
>my identity is that of a reactionary
>I'm better than the common person and seek validation for that on 4chan's /lit/
>I am smarter than 99.9% of the population, and I need to tell strangers online
>my uniqueness is always on my mind

Yeah, you're you're beyond the narcissistic personality of our age

>>8320012
Are you retarded? This whole thread is on the concept of the current trends and their reactionary counterparts.

>>8320046
The reactionary counterpart is just as much a part of it. There's no escaping it.

See /pol/.

>>8320043
This thread just keeps getting dumber and dumber; I hope it ends when the summer's over. I never identified as a reactionary, and it's presumptuous of you to assume I do when I convey an abstract concept that may or may not be related to the current "movement." Never did I seek validation for my "narcissism," I simply asked for any sort of opinions regarding the belief that one is better than another - a defining trait of this board is the belief, even if masked by irony, in differentiation between plebeians and patricians.

>>8320054
Exactly; I guess I should have put some quotation-marks around the "reactionary" bit as I did all of the others.

>>8320063
Sorry, man.

>>8320063
I mean, you're right in identifying elitism as rampant throughout this board (both a good and a bad thing), but this has been constant throughout literary history, becoming self-conscious with the modernists:
"We can only say that it appears likely that poets in our civilization, as it exists at present, must be difficult. Our civilization comprehends great variety and complexity, and this variety and complexity, playing upon a refined sensibility, must produce various and complex results. The poet must become more and more comprehensive, more allusive, more indirect, in order to force, to dislocate if necessary, language into his meaning."
Which is T.S Eliot's way of justifying it, and you only need to look at a page of Ulysses to see similar thinking going on there.
But the contemporary elitism, present on this board, like you say buried under a heap of irony, is different. It's equally self-conscious and maybe even more reactionary than modernist elitism, because we live in a much more anti-intellectual climate (again, not an entirely bad thing, though with obvious drawbacks). But it serves a different purpose, or maybe no purpose at all, because we're all aware of the absurdity of knowing the things we know (hence, the irony, which reflects this). We all know deep down that no one really values being "well-read" or "literary" in the same way they used to. It's lost its social currency.
Anyway, them's my two cents on the topic of elitism, like you asked anon :)

>>8320118
I'll say, with sincerity, that I really appreciate this reply - definitely insightful, and I appreciate you taking the time to write it out.

>>8320149
Aw thanks man, you seem like a pretty cool guy. That's what I like about 4chan. Its pretty hostile almost all the time, but there are times when the hostility lets up. And those moments are a lot more meaningful than anywhere else on the internet, cuz of how they contrast with the usual tone of the site.
So thanks again dude

>>8320184
>>8320149
Fucking faggots

>>8319901
>This leads to two movements:
>Firstly we have the people who don't want to deal with this complicated stuff, who only care about their own life. This is by many perceived as narcissistic and selfish.
>Secondly, people who feel an obligation to tackle the problems but ultimately fail to do so on their own. You have a lot of idealistic people who have become cynics/pessimists. True enthusiasm about achieving a better world order is rarely seen (esp if you compare it to the 90s, the 50s and other times of wide spread optimism).
Absolutely on the nose
People are keenly aware, though they may not always, or even know how to, verbalize it, that things aren't great.
A lot of common wisdom and thought isn't really holding up to modern challenges and many don't even seem to have solutions within current ways of thinking.
People are increasingly alienated and hopeless, it's especially evident and visible in the younger generation who have retreated most obviously into either narcissism (social media) or ironic detachment. They probably wouldn't call the latter cynicism or nihilism, but it's certainly reflective of those views

>>8320225
Social media narcissism is the emptiest narcissism of all; fortunately it is less harmful/irritating than real-life narcissism but it demands more attention. Internet attention simply does not mean as much to us as 'real' attention.
In fact, this may lead to the appearance of narcissism, when in fact this appearance is produced by normal people seeking to communicate through the most popular medium of the age and coming out short-changed because of the lack of emotional salience.
There is also often a distinct lack of company for its own sake - it has to be clothed in alcohol, drugs, tobacco, clubbing, any condoned social setting; and as such may not provide deep enough relationships. They are built around distractions because it is embarrassing to focus on just a person. This is inescapable to some extent; people have to have a setting in which to interact - but the chosen settings at the moment are not conducive to fulfilling relationships. At least, not the kinds of relationship that would fulfil me.

>>8320203
lol got 'em

>>8320184
You get the honesty of human race from 4 Chan. People don't sit around dancing all the time irl.

>>8319791

The biggest "thing" of our time is how we practically live on the internet and social media now. And how we're not really prepared to deal with that. It fucks with our conception of reality.