Thread replies: 32
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4
File: 1412974688906.png (108KB, 400x381px) Image search:
[Google]
108KB, 400x381px
How am I supposed to take the literary community seriously when there was so much "death of the republic!!!" over emotional bullshittery in the media, with every journalist, novelist, film maker, psychologist, economist, and assorted social scientists literally lining up to write overblown shit about events in 2016? According to many people on lit I should continue to buy their stuff and give them my money and attention and take their opinions more seriously than my own.
I'm serious. There was always some Princeton Professor of Public Discourse or Amherst Lecturer in Philology read to wade in with appeals to analogy, strawmen, false narratives, trivial concepts and frameworks, false dichotomies, and so on. Of course that's what they do for a living anyway but when they speak without their trivial jargon not even the biggest pseudo intellectual can deny it.
Maybe literature is just entertainment like that KitKat I had a few minutes ago... no, that can't be it... how could all the theorising be justified if that was the case...
>>
>>8972854
Have you considered working as a chef? Because that's some delicious pasta.
>>
>>8972882
Nice one
>>
>>
>politics
>literary
>>
>>8972854
>How am I supposed to take the literary community seriously
You're not. Create a clear distinction in your mind between the literature itself and the institutions that seek to ruin it.
>>
I think it's unavoidable. Even Supreme Court Justices engage in all the same types of arguments that you've limned.
It might just be human to make a determination then cycle back to find any justification for that determination--no matter how tenuous or questionable.
>>
File: 1427738185371.jpg (44KB, 673x604px) Image search:
[Google]
44KB, 673x604px
>>8972854
>t. assmad because smart people know you elected a moron
>>
>>8972983
kek
so blunt but so true
>>
>>8972854
>thinking politics has anything to do with the aesthetic value of a work of literature
kys
>>
>>8972854
MSM killed literature, friend.
>>
>>8973013
>I'm with her: the post
>>
>>8972947
>was not a pasta
It is now.
>>
>>8972854
>How am I supposed to take the literary community seriously
nobody is in need of your respect, anon
>>
>>8974773
But everyone is in need of respect.
>>
>>8974788
insecure much?
>>
File: president having a laugh.png (232KB, 433x425px) Image search:
[Google]
232KB, 433x425px
>>8973013
>smart people
>couldn't even realize they were supporting a known criminal who skirts the law due to her connections
>calling Trump a moron when he bested your entire party
Project some more, please!
>>
The problem is that the vast majority of people are incredibly stupid and uninformed, but act like they aren't.
>>
the humanities are dead - this isn't news.
but yeah, reading good books doesn't necessarily make you a good person or any more perceptive than otherwise. The inner party officials and apparatchiks in the Soviet Union all knew their Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, didn't stop them from becoming irredeemably corrupt. Stalin read the Brothers Karamazov three times.
its just a status thing for a lot of upper-class types, one must "acquire culture"
>>
>>8974870
This, just take a look at /pol/
>>
>>8972947
That's not funny though
>>
File: 1467720527813.gif (1MB, 257x192px) Image search:
[Google]
1MB, 257x192px
>>8974804
Not him, but why are authoritarian leftists such condescending cuntholes when they find out someone has a different opinion? Tbqh I find the behavioural similarities between the indoctrinated authoritarian and the religious zealot to be quite fascinating. Does anyone have any insight on this phenomena? Will starting with the Greeks help me gain a greater understanding? pls respons
>>
>every journalist, novelist, film maker, psychologist, economist, and assorted social scientists literally lining up to write overblown shit about events in 2016?
Name 20.
>>
>>
>>8972854
it is a kit kat. it is an industry. but it's also art. a writer is also a thinker, so they might have opinions.
>and take their opinions more seriously than my own.
who told you that? of course you shouldn't, you should think for yourself
>>
>>8975486
>Not him, but why are authoritarian leftists such condescending cuntholes when they find out someone has a different opinion? Tbqh I find the behavioural similarities between the indoctrinated authoritarian and the religious zealot to be quite fascinating. Does anyone have any insight on this phenomena? Will starting with the Greeks help me gain a greater understanding? pls respons
it's human nature. when people are sure of being right, like a leftist or religious zealot will inevitably be, they will not understand your perspective and assume you're stupid, which leads to condescendence
>>
>>8975486
start with the greeks
>>
>>8975705
>proceeds to make a broad condescending statement identical to the very thing he is criticising
makes you think
>>
Anon, you just need to follow Christ and you'll be all right.
Surely you're a Christian, yes?
>>
>>8975747
>sees condescendence and criticism in the post
it's a paranoid
>>
>>8975486
Yeah man pol is a regarded place
>>
>>8975757
unironically this t b h
Thread posts: 32
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4