http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/b ooks/review/throwing-ann

File: Crash.jpg (431KB, 1100x620px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1100x620px

>>8812836
>Todd Gitlin is chairman of the Ph.D. program in communications at Columbia University and the author of “The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage.”

lmao of course.

Batten down the hatches and bar the gates. This is the future. We lost decades ago. Now we get to watch the literary landscape tear itself apart with useless cupcake fascist idiots trying to censor history and perform butcher jobs on classic literature.

I'm not even mad, just disappointed.

>>8812836
that beard looks shooped

>>8812836
>http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/books/review/throwing-anna-under-the-train.html

How is this any different than, "hey, Chuck, watch how many hits I can get on this thread"

>>8812896
I think it's pretty interesting how far the rabbit hole of politicization goes.

>>8812836
this is satire right?

>>8812836

>phallocentric

Hahaha, holy fuck, people use this term unironically?

>>8812836
i thought the NYT was supposed to be the "serious" new york paper?

>>8812836
>Todd Gitlin
>Corresponding Secretary
>Committee for Literary Purification

yeah pretty sure this is a rather tiresomely standard satire of "extreme" feminism by a man who stands with the literary establishment

zzz

WAKE ME UP

>>8812995
It's amazing that nobody else in this thread has managed to pick up on the satire despite it being so obvious. God, /lit/ is stupid.

>>8813079
I read this and still thought it's real.
I *can* believe it. I've seen weirder extremism.

It both is and isn't satire. Clearly, we can look to:
>From the available evidence, you are male — a white male, in fact. If you are not literally Caucasian, we know you invaded the Caucasus in your youth. Likely, it was there that you learned the ultimate male power — to kill.
as evidence of it mainly being a joke.

But it also somewhat seriously defends its central point -- that Anna Karenina is a book written not from a woman's POV but from the perspective of male privilege.

The other funny thing, of course, is that the writer himself is male, even though the first lines of the article are:
>It has come to our attention that you have offered for sale a book that purports to describe the world from the point of view of a woman — even as actual women everywhere are, in practice, erased.

So, I don't know what to make of this.

Obviously, it's meant to be clickbait, but I guess it's also meant to start a real conversation about whether its claims are true. That alone seems to suggest it takes the extreme feminists' perspectives seriously.

>>8812836
whiny cunt mad that a whore gets killed in a shitty soap opera, i'm supposed to give a fuck? no sirreebob

>it's a /lit/ baits itself with obvious satire edition

File: me rn 2.jpg (478KB, 1600x1182px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 1600x1182px

>>8813379
I'll fuckin slap u if u call Based Leo a soap writer to my face boyo

>>8812836
I put off reading Anna Karenina for a long time because I was reluctant to read a book about a woman
I'm glad I finally did get around to reading it, the scenes with Levin duck hunting with his dog, or just mowing grain on his farm are just so damn comfy.
Plus Vronsky was alpha as fuck, racing horses, fucking sloots and then at the end bravely going to Serbia to remove kebab or die trying.

File: GetFile.aspx.jpg (174KB, 600x549px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 600x549px

>>8813079
it's amazing that you don't get that the responses to this thread aren't sincere. it's almost like we're on 4chan