>I fell for the "classic books are good" meme
>>7491111
what classics did you read that werent good?
>>7491111
>books from hundreds/thousands of years ago still being sold successfully
>not good
Pick one OP
>>7491123
argumentum ad populum, anon
>>7491130
Nice try faggot, but no.
A work of art(book,film,painting, etc.) that is still popular hundreds or thousands of years after its time couldn't be considered anything but good.
>>7491141
>life has been going on for billions of year
>therefore life must be good
you don't believe that
>>7491141
argumentum ad populum, anon
you even used the word popular in your argument this time.
>>7491111
You don't read the classics because they're "good". You read them for their cultural importance.
>>7491147
Well then, if a book is not good or bad based on how man people like it, then what measures the true worth of a book?
>>7491146
Unironically posting this with your living self.
>>7491146
Also, nothing to do with ad populum.
>>7491156
whether or not you personally think it's good.
>>7491147
Clearly he believes that that fallacy, insofar as it is a fallacy, has its limits and that in a certain respect. Longevity of mame is a measure of greatness in art, as the fame transcends normal mortality. That is goal for which great art is created, on the level of Dante (see limbo when he meets great poets and the 8th circle when he meets Odysseus), Shakespeare (sonnet 18), and Milton (I may assert th'eternal prvovidence / And justify the ways of God to man.)
You probably haven't read great literature if cannot see the genius of the authors of great literature. And the driving creative steroid is this ambition to be remembered forever. This ambition drives them as it drove Julius Caesar or Genghis Khan or Alexander the Great to conquer the world. It is the yes to life and becoming.
>he reads for the plot
>>7491196
i don't agree that great art is always created with the intention of longevity. many works of art were not intended to be released, and even not in those instances, the creators were doubtlessly more invested in the creation than ensuring the fame of their work. i think it's awfully presumptuous of you to think that every artist is mostly concerned with the propagation and immortality of their art.
>>7491196
This is the most pretentious post I have ever read.
>>7491196
>humanities majors in a nutshell
