>There has never been a woman writer on the level of

>>9947867
Yeah, you're right, anon, Virginia Woolf really is underappreciated. That slag, pictured, of a "writer" of "philosophy" which is thinly-veiled bootlicking is shite though

>>9947867

Great point, anon, Emily Dickinson's talents truly do belong among the greats and her work is immortal.

I- ... is that a picture of a transgendered individual?

>>9947867
>Women have often more of what is called good sense then men. They have fewer pretensions; are less implicated in theories; and judge of objects more from their immediate and involuntary impression on the mind, and, therefore, more truly and naturally. They cannot reason wrong; for they do not reason at all. They do not think or speak by rule; and they have in general more eloquence and wit, as well as sense, on that account. By their wit, sense and eloquence together, they generally contrive to govern their husbands. Their style, when they write to their friends (not for the booksellers), is better than that of most authors.

'On the Ignorance of the Learned.' By William Hazlitt (1822)

>>9947942
>then
OK, Bill.

File: latest.jpg (582KB, 953x1416px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 953x1416px

wrong pic

>>9947956
yep that's the wrong pic alright
O you were joking? Well how about fuck you you fucking pseud

You all jest but Ayn is a genuine master writer who writes about philosophy and ideology and infuses them in the story of men. It is amazing stuff

>>9948007
Ayn Begins to edgy teens /lit/ hate it

>>9947867
funny that you put Tolstoy alongside shakespeare considering Tolsoy absolutely despised Shakespeare

>>9947867
Flannery O'Connor really is bae

>>9949065
sometimes people dislike other people

>>9947867
Literally what is Middlemarch

There's what, like max 10 authors on that level?

I mean, considering how much more access men have been given than women for the resources of writing (see: a room of one's own) this isn't surprising.

>>9947956

I want to fuck her and jizz on her so much.

>>9947867
Austen

Eliot >= Tolstoy
O'Connor > Faulkner, McCarthy, anyone you care to name
Munro = Chekov
Austen >= Dickens
Woolf > Joyce

Only the Shakespeare equivalent is hard, but name a man on the level of Shakespeare?

people who use the word "woman" as an adjective are subhuman

>>9947867
once you get to the level of tolstoy and shakespeare it becomes very difficult to rank authors effectively.

very hard to argue that dickinson isn't better than tolstoy or vice-versa. i'm not saying that all taste is subjective, but there is a plateau which the greats hit that makes it difficult to distinguish authors further than "one of the best."

tolstoy and shakespeare do have one extra thing going for them, though: they both published a fuck ton of material. very few of the greats came anywhere close to their volume of work. i would argue that flannery o'connor is a better short story writer than tolstoy, but tolstoy also mastered the forms of the novel and the essay (yes i've read wise blood - it's good but not as good as anna k). so in that sense, no, i don't think anyone really matches tolstoy or shakespeare in overall talent+output

that said, stop /pol/ baiting on lit. women can write just as well as men.

>>9951487
>Eliot >= Tolstoy
>Munro = Chekov
whew lad

File: kek.jpg (38KB, 611x404px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 611x404px

>>9951592
>women can write just as well as men

>>9951510
yep only women are allowed to be sexist am I right 'all men are piggggs' 'the patriarchy is evil' 'white malesss ew'

>>9951727
i think they meant that you should use female as the adjective instead

>>9947867
>pic unrelated