What is your opinion of anonymity in literature and poetry? Do

>>9831382
I general, I dislike anonymous literature because I believe that the author's background can reveal a lot about intent, context and meaning.

>>9831388
>authorial intent

you need to go back

>>9831382
Inb4 no on publishes white men anymore

To answer your question op, I think it can force readers to address the word with no consideration of the source which can be good. On another level it's not so necessary anymore. George Elliot was a male pseudonym so that her books could be published. But that was a different time. Now there are so many journals that there is space for most anyone of talent.

>>9831388
I agree that when things are written anonymously, it loses the authority aspect of an argument, but I also feel like art and ideas lose vanity when there isn't a face behind it.

>>9831393
>2017
>still repeating Barthes's bullshit about the death of the author

wew lads

>>9831403
>sees "authorial intent"
>thinks barthes

you have to go back

>>9831405
I think you do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Death_of_the_Author
> Barthes' essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the intentions and biographical context of an author in an interpretation of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated.

>>9831413
>he doesnt know anything about literary theory except for one random meme

you have to go back

>>9831382
In what capacity? To write controversial literature and avoid blowback? Sure.
To have all individual works unbiasedly appraised for their literary value rather than cult of personality as in the *chan principle? Only if you use a different pseudonym for every book. To not do so defeats the purpose as it still establishes a relationship of name and reputation with prior work.

>>9831397
Thing is, there hardly are any real anonymous works. Academics are always able to figure it out, or the author comes forward to claim their work (posthumously)

>>9831436
You keep repeating 'you have to go back' as if it refutes anything I said.

>>9831443
just go back

>>9831382
I think necessary if you want to write honest literature in this day and age

>>9831438
What would be the best way for an author to conceal their identity, yet still publish their work?

>>9831382
Sauce on this pic?

>>9831443
he's right, go back

>>9831443
gobak