Whats the name of your novel anon?
>School of Resentment is a term coined by critic Harold Bloom to describe related schools of literary criticism which have gained prominence in academia since the 1970s and which Bloom contends are preoccupied with political and social activism at the expense of aesthetic values.
I think Harold Bloom's prophecy that criticism of literature through the lenses of ideological bias, such as feminism, gender theory, Marxism, etc has come to ring true. Considering how identity politics and grievance culture has embedded itself so deeply in modern society, to the point where no group or crowed is able to insulate itself from its influence, what do you think can be done to save literature from being scrutinized with contemporary sensibilities to the point where some things are outright removed from, or simply never make it to the modern person or families libraries because of unnecessary application of sociological perspective. Any perceived infraction or disagreement is oft enough to completely dismiss the entire thing. Young minds and entire generation will be denied master pieces because of stupidity!
I know this is heading down a slippery slope fallacy, but there is no doubt that things are escalating. We're at a point where The Onion is becoming less and less funny satire and more a surreal reminder.
In the past when books were altered or banned for language that groups like the religious right deemed unacceptable, the reasonable people on the left would be there to combat them, but now it is the left whom are teetering towards the same path; not by outright banning it or book burning -- but by casting them aside to the "not progressive enough bin" and trying their damnedest to shame other people into thinking like them.
Racist, bigot, xenophobic, homophobic, problematic -- all words which could ruin the reputation of a book, and not allow it to reach the mind of someone who would otherwise benefit and become a better person from its contents. I hope I'm not alone in thinking that the coddling hand of the SJW is a cancer on /lit/.
Those on the left who still hold certain values to be true would probably have to realize it and concede in helping members of the right who aren't cuckked in order to help combat this lunacy.
Old one at 300+.
Post 'em and be judged.
Wow. Is that a first edition The Snowy Day that I see? Keats nearly lost his mind writing that book, and he never fully recovered. His follow up, The Sunny Beach, was complete shit.
This is pleb tier anon, get your child the Grimm fairy tales you plebeus maximus
Dubs decide what we read next.
Does /lit/ approve of Sylvia Plath?
the /lit/ hivemind probably rejects her because she's a woman. i'm not too familiar with her work but i thought The Bell Jar was pretty good, in a way. i have had a few close friends with depression and it really captured the illogical nature of it.
A Post Your Favorite Book Thread
a need new books
Toss up between pic related and The Brothers Karamazov.
What's the best Beowulf translation? Has anyone read Tolkien's?
What are some of the lesser known writings of the Greek mythological canon that you enjoy? The Seven Against Thebes/Epigoni together once you have the full tapestry of the story conceptualized with detail in your mind creates one of the most poignant stories in the full saga of myths. Tydeus and Diomedes are nearly as good of a distant father and son story as Odysseus and Telemachus
nope not much at all. i'm studying classics at oxford and we probably have the largest classics department in the world. out of the 100 or so options we can do for our final exams, not one of them includes Alcestis. there's lots of euripides in there but that play just doesn't ever seem to be studied in detail.
This thread again? Why such a hard on for Aeschylus? Why make several identical threads about this one particular play? Be honest, is this the only thing you've ever read?
What's the opinion on pic related? Are they worth it? I read actual books but everyone around me swears by e-reader pleb-tier bullshit.
Is it queer lit?
Are you dog earing the pages?
Who all do I absolutely have to read before Descartes? I've read The Art and Thought of Heraclitus, Plato, Aristotle, and Marcus Aurelius. I'm not gonna read all 3,000 pages of Summa Theologica. Anything else I need? Sextus Empiricus? Augustine? The reason I'm asking is because the sticky has an assload of shit before modern philosophy and that's what I'm in this for. How did you guys do it? Thanks in advance
>The reason I'm asking is because the sticky has an assload of shit before modern philosophy and that's what I'm in this for
If you're interested in Modern philosophy you can literally just start with Descartes for fucks sake.
>been at it for an hour or two
>on a roll with a few paragraphs
>feeling good, man
>tfw you write THAT sentence that gives you a quick tingling feeling all over
post your favorite writing feels, fellas
What does /lit/ think about pic related? I was recently at a poetry slam where the participants did Bukowski-themed poems and it was really great. I would love to get into his work.
There are a like 5 bukowski threads right now
Use the fucking catalog
Rate my shelf /lit/
Honestly probably one of the most prolific collections of contemporary literature I've seen in years. I can almost smell the turning of aged pages and the sound of the noose I wish you were tying to hang yourself.
Aquinas BTFO of Hume and all modern and postmodern philosophy:
>On the contrary, The intelligible species is to the intellect what the sensible image is to the sense. But the sensible image is not what is perceived, but rather that by which sense perceives. Therefore the intelligible species is not what is actually understood, but that by which the intellect understands.
>I answer that, Some have asserted that our intellectual faculties know only the impression made on them; as, for example, that sense is cognizant...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
This is the main part:
>The intelligible species is to the intellect what the sensible image is to the sense. But the sensible image is not what is perceived, but rather that by which sense perceives. Therefore the intelligible species is not what is actually understood, but that by which the intellect understands.
Have we not realised that all of modern philosophy has committed this basic error of saying that what we sense is our own sensation, what we perceive is our own perception, what we understand is our own ideas? This ultimately...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
sound, light, temperature, as we perceive them, don't actually exist. They are created by our brain so we can understand the world, but we don't actually percieved the world for what it really is.