Classism
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
What's the most blatant example of classism in the study of Western Literature and why is it the Shakespeare Authorship Debate?
>>8025090
the most blatant example of classism in the study of Western Literature is leftist authors complaining about the successful
>>8025245
>leftist authors complaining about the successful
unless the successful is a leftist
there is literally no debate around Shakespearean authorship within academia
hollywood making movies and cracked articles does not count as "study of western literature"
>>8025834
I thought the Oxford theory was gaining ground quickly? Am I wrong?
>>8025949
> muh Oxford
Shakespeare wrote with Middleton and with Fletcher.
Middleton, we know, wrote and edited parts of Macbeth and Measure for Measure.
>>8025090
Anyone else notice that everyone in that picture is white?
Good old western academia. god bless. But no, please, go on with your complaint that people are classist against Shakespeare. It's clearly a big issue.
>>8026541
>Anyone else notice that everyone in that picture is white? Good old western academia. god bless.
It's a photo from the teen action movie "Kingsman: The Secret Service".
>>8026591
yes, it's a metaphor.
OP represents academic classism via a picture that more poignantly sums up much of academic racism, and ignores the latter in a way typical of academia. finit.
>>8026603
two ladies, no niggers. only a chav, my friend, and those, unlike American white folk turned to the dark side so to speak are so far as I know not created by blark people culture infringing on white people culture
>>8025949
very
>>8026764
>yes, it's a metaphor.
Don't try to bullshit your way out of this, Anon.
Shakespeare had noble blood, whether his family tree evidences it or not. No mere plebeian could have produced such immortal works
>>8026764
>no niggers
>>8025090
Yes it's classism. It's sad really.
I gotta be honest, guys. I used to be 100%, no doubt, absolutely convinced the traditional Shakespeare was Shakespeare. I have to admit the Oxfordians make a good argument. A real good argument.
Can you guys recommend me anything that can definitively dismiss the Oxfordians? Using historic, sourced facts?
>>8026950
What "argument" did the Oxfordians to convince you? Just seems to be a blatant projection of classism, as the OP implied.
>>8025090
>all these ugly british people
>>8026967
Well they haven't convinced me. I'm just saying they make a fairly compelling argument. I can't reference one thing that "convinced" me.
And yeah, I used to think it was classism, too.
>>8026950
First ten (?) pages of Shakespeare Only, by Jeffrey Knapp
Find it on libgen
>>8027006
WHAT fairly compelling argument?
This is an anonymous board. I have no idea who you are. I can't just look up your previous posts to know what you're actually referring to.
>>8029003
(not the guy you were responding to)
