Have you realised that the information age, with the huge amount

>>8766781

I kno ryt, reading le Pinecone of d00ms Gravity's Rainbow makese me le smart! :P

>>8766776
you sound like you have an iq of like 120. kys

OP I think you're a wonderful person and a genius. I would like to read more of your godly insights.

>>8766776
>Ultimately all this "well read" stuff was just a way for groups of people to signal social status / intellectualism or deriving other benefits by grouping their claimed interests together. We see it today when the academia-media-publishing industrial complex tells you that you have to read books or you're stupid. But this has been taken to a farcical new level now that writers like Tao Lin / Mira Gonzalez exist. It's also clear in other places but I mention books to make it clear to this place.

I claim that the abundance of information has not destroyed the notion of being well-read, but changed it to a notion of "reading well".

As Borges outlines in the Library of Babel short story, the abundance of information simply becomes the setting for politics to play out. Cults and mysticisms take the information-rich environment for granted, and emphasise literary hermeneutics rather than literary content.

It means that having status as a literary "somebody" is more about knowing "how" to read, rather than "what" to read.

File: 11_Leather_spines.pngfd3aed1f-7ddf-4b8e-952c-9d17f26cfd08Original.jpg (700KB, 2048x1024px) Image search: [Google]

700KB, 2048x1024px

>>8766776
English profs figured out long ago that nobody could be truly "well read." There just isn't time in a lifetime: even when we specialize and focus, the task is impossible. I agree with the sentiments, but the implication that this devalues reading or acquiring knowledge in any way is silly. You don't stop having sex because you'll never get to fuck any meaningful percentage of the world's girls, or eat much of the world's food, etc. I've read thousands of books, hope to read thousands more, and enjoy learning and discussing literature.

>"being well read is a waste of time!"
>proceeds to write lengthy, unimaginative shitposts for months and months

>>8766776
First off, kys you absolute faggot

Second, if we were to go by your logic, one shouldn't have sex with next door girls because he will never get to fuck all those supermodels out there. You make the best out of what you have knowing that even though you'll never reach an ultimate truth, each step you take leaves you better off than when you first started.
And besides, specialists do actually agree on the biggest chunk of subjects concerning their field of study (economists for example almost agree on everything but differ only in a narrow range of technicalities), so yeah, if you decide to specialize in something, there's a good chance that you will reach some concrete conclusions that are recognized to be universally true.

>>8766776

Being well read was more than a determination of social status. For what reason would men and more rarely, women of old nobility, even poor scholars, learn as much as possible and convene? It wasn't to just circlejerk like we do here, it was to discuss and develop ideas about what they've learned.

What you're meaning to say is that being "well read" is more rare now because EVERY pseudo-intellectual faggot with purple hair and fake prescription glasses can get a few thousand views on YouTube or tweet something, and worst of all, be affirmed by thousands of people who are ignorant on the topic of the specific literature being discussed. The fools have been given a voice, this is the problem. Beyond that, tons of smut and garbage has come to life in the form of e-books and electronic media has drowned out the potentially good literature and media present in the swamp everlasting that is the internet.

I can't tell if you're trying to shit post but for the sake of discussion I'll assume you are not.

>>8767447

it isnt a full shitpost.
It is true that when Diderot and the other XVIII century Frechmen tried to create the first Encyclopaedia they thought it was possible to write a collection of books that contained all human scientific knowledge.
Now that would be ridiculous.

there is a conflict between the ammount of knowledge and human biology.
for hundreds of thousands of years adolescense didnt exist and humans were adults who worked and married and fucked and raised kids since they were teenagers, now the modern world requires humans to study many years, and it isnt rare for people to have been in college without working almost all their 20s, with a personality that doesnt resemble that of a full adult.
our bodies arent ready for this