Writing styles ranked

Move The Bard to mediocre and I'm pretty much good with this list.

File: 1492428484902.png (29KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x400px

>>9599218
>DFW on "Bad"

>>9599218
Are we to assume that you think these sets aren't mutually exclusive, or did you just copy this list, modify it, and forget to remove Joyce from 1 of the 2 categories?

Move Joyce and Proust to great.
Move Nabovok to bad.
Move Shakespeare and Milton to God.
Move Dostoevsky to great.

God tier:
>Tolstoy
>Proust
>Woolf
>Joyce
>Nabokov

Bad:
>DFW
>Hemingway
>McCarthy
>Gaddis

>>9599350
>Move Joyce and Proust to great.
They set the standard for our time, and labored excessively to achieve their greatness. They'll be staying there.

>Move Nabovok to bad.
Nabokov is silky smooth rhythmic prose, I can't see a reason to move him as of yet.

>Move Shakespeare and Milton to God.
A little too ornate and brittle for each. Both are only quoted out of tradition, and sound awkward and stilted today.

>Move Dostoevsky to great.
While a brilliant storyteller, and deservedly a titan of the modern age, his actual prose and sentence structure was a means to an end, and is high pulp.

>>9599326
DFW is bad and you should feel bad

>Faulkner no where to be found

Yikes

>>9599590
hes barely above fitzgerald

>>9599218
Off yourself

>>9599218
what of virginia woolf? what of kafka or faulkner?

>>9599689
WHAT OF CHEKHOV???

>>9599218
can you bitches stop reposting terrible posts in an already existing thread as a new thread

File: IMG_8948.png (64KB, 658x901px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 658x901px

>>9599218
>Pynchon
>great
He fell for the meme.

>>9599689
>>9599694
if you've read them you'd know where to place them.

>>9599666
Faulkner was leagues above Fitzgerald.

File: IMG_0090.gif (78KB, 506x700px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 506x700px

>>9599218
>wolfe

>>9599689
what of Petrarch? what of Goethe??

>>9599218
so, you have Gene Wolfe and Shakespeare on the same tier. What in the fucking christ is wrong with you?

show me a poem by wolfe that compares to sonnet 147, for example. no no, i'll wait.

DFW is actually good.

>>9599218

Add Sir Thomas Browne to God-tier. And you can't compare writing in translation to original English prose or verse, it's incoherent.

God-tier writing:
Dante
Nabokov
Joyce
Proust

Great writing:
The Bard
Joyce
Milton
Blake
Borges
Wolfe
Pynchon

Good writing:
Fitzgerald
Dostoevsky
Joyce
McCarthy
Lovecraft

Mediocre writing:
Hemingway
Steinbeck
Stephen King
Joyce
Bad writing:
DFW
Vonnegut
Joyce
Joseph Heller

>>9599766
He ranked them as writers over all, not as a poets, you autistic faggot

>>9600112
one single poem written by Shakespeare is greater than Wolfe's entire oeuvre combined and rewritten by a better author. that was my implication, you scumsucking shitforbrains. go inhale some heptane and set fire to your nosehairs. you inside out cunt, who the fuck are you to interfere anyway?

>>9600135
I am sure Wolfe refers here to Thomas, not Gene.

>>9600166
well, if that's the case, maybe, i know little of him. i doubt it though.

>>9599218
>Bard anywhere but god-tier

>>9599374
>A little too ornate and brittle for each. Both are only quoted out of tradition, and sound awkward and stilted today.
kys

>>9600226
>kys
you sound like you're inching towards that yourself, oh ornate and brittle one

>>9600422
>nou
convincing.

>>9600422
>ornate and brittle
But like what the hell do you even mean by this. Nakakov and Joyce are 'ornate'.
>brittle
Seriously what the fuck. All great prose is 'brittle'.