Is it wrong if literature is a part of your identity?

>>9830980
Yes

YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME NOW

You're not the boss of me now

And you're not so big

>>9830980
People integrate shit like their favorite sports Team or their preferred music in the their identity so I dont see why you shouldnt

>>9830980
Ulysses is shit; Finnegans Wake is much better: fite me

>>9830980
I think basing your whole self around consumption in general is a pretty slippery slope, yes.

Is it a problem socially? Probably not, at least not now-a-days; is it a problem personally? Most definitely.

If you don't mean literature as essentially "consuming literature", however, then disregard my post.

>>9830980
no
that's how ppl know ur dtf

It depends on how much of your identity literature is.

If you have no other identity, then it's a problem. Defining yourself with one activity is usually bad faith.

>>9830980
A friend of mine ask for a book time ago and i found him doing that pic related over my book
Jesus.

>14 posters
really made my neurons think

>>9830980
Its just entertainment. People who define themselves based on movies, sports, tv shows, etc are pathetic. You define yourself by how you live, don't be that person who sat on his couch and consumed his whole life.

You'd have to define wrong first. Is it wrong for people who love film to have it as an integral part of their identities? As far as I'm concerned, it's only wrong if its some sort of superficial adornment, like you read just to say you read. Literature, to say that you read better quality books than most. Elitism, in an easily accessible domain isn't so bad. In my understanding, it is wrong for literature to be part of your identity ONLY if you don't actually enjoy literature.

>>9830980
BLACKED

Yeah, I'm sure nothing gets those winks rolling in like saying literature is part of your personality in your singles ad.