Who here achieved a high literary status yet? Or feels like it to some degree?
How does it feel compared to when you considered yourself ignorant on most issues and authors?
Most of the people I know consider me well read, but the more I learn the more ignorant I feel and the less likely I am to provide my opinion on a topic.
And here, poor fool! with all my lore. I stand, no wiser than before
>>8076390
Dunning-Kruger effect.
>>8076375
I've stopped trying once I realised it's mere frivolous vanity. Now I unlearn every day.
>>8076390
le all i know is that i know nothing
>>8076390
>And here, poor fool! with all my lore. I stand, no wiser than before
But more diplomatic and humble.
>>8076375
I wanna live in a house like that, but most likely I'll live in a small kitchen sized appartment with wifi as my sole luxury.
>>8076403
There's something to be said for that at least.
Tao here
It feels good
>>8076375
It honestly doesn't feel all that different. At least in terms of how much people want to hear me talk, or how I think of myself.
I can converse well with the big names in my field at conferences--even the elevator talk is magnitudes better than anything I've ever got from /lit/. But when I come home from that, I have a family who for the most part don't give a shit about the books I read or the research I've done or whatever I'm writing. So I've never had an issue being pretentious.
I work with several publishers in my field, and so have got to know the translators who translated the books I read when I first got into my area. That's probably the biggest change. I "know" people and have connections, which I didn't even consider earlier. But it's also pretty grounding; some of them are in their 60s, have won major awards and international accolades. But on Facebook it's just the regular stuff. Pictures of their garden or bragging about kids. "High literary status" doesn't really change you.
>>8076415
Sounds muhc better, those big shitty meme houses just need a lot of cleaning and upkeep once the novelty wears off. Small spaces have a lot of cosy potential
>>8076415
It's just a room with a projector, a bunch of pillows and a fireplace.
I actually find that I have become more narrow-minded compared to my earlier enthusiasm for literature. Some might consider that narrow-mindedness to be "taste." I'm not sure, 2bh.
>>8076489
>nouveau-riche.jpg
>>8076510
i legitimately get triggered by a lot more things now, especially when my 'tolerance' get thrown back into my face.
crude example
>sitting next to a person who's ideologically an analytic or what have you
>be polite and not call him a retard
>he calls me a retard
>YOU HAVE AWOKEN A SUN LION WHO WILL EAT YOU, YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR CHILDREN'S CHILDREN.jpg
My laser-like superiority knows no mercy.
>>8076564
Is Sam Harris that which /lit/ has to overcome to truly let go of its patrician adolescence?
A re-acceptance of its childish curiosity in the form of the Sam "the meditation master" Harris? A yidam, if any, of pure reason.
>>8076432
saved as pasta
>>8076375
I am a gentleman of high literary status. AMA
>>8076550
Dead-on. OP pic is the kind of house someone would build whose daddy is first gen filthy rich. Even daddy would have more taste.
>>8076432
i was going to try to make an earnest post in this thread but i decided not to, because i couldn't find a way not to be douchy
looks like i made the right choice
>>8076713
It does sound that way when I reread it. I'm not claiming I'm a big deal though, just around some who are (in academia). I'm still only a grad student.
>>8076489
>when u win the lottery and tell the architect to make it just like the all in resort in turkey
>>8076375
that looks so unbelievably cozy and comfortable
>>8076478
This. I grew up in a big house and I would hate to have one without help to clean it, and I hate dealing with the help. I suppose I'd do it if I had a family and wanted extra room for them, but I Imagine I'd downsize once the kids are gone.
>>8076550
>>8076762
That looks like a nice place to chill out in the summer. What do all you sophisticated WASP shipping magnates have in your back yard?
>>8076564
Likewise. I estimate that 90% of my /lit/ posts are shitposts bashing other people's taste. As far as literature in public goes, I never have the opportunity to discuss it except with my girlfriend and family so most of the time they're nodding along with my autistic opinion.
>>8076510
In an artistic (not scholarly) sense, literature is all about taste, so a more defined taste is pretty much inevitable the more you read, much the same way artists develop a more distinct voice the longer they work.
>not living in a Bourbon era castle
Holy shit, and you all wanna be elite?
Try again, knave.
>>8076375
Reading has made me doubt everything. Nowadays I don't even bother thinking about things, because I know I never will come to any sort of conclusion that makes sense. I guess reading made me a super socialconstructivist. I also think that reading has given me more inhibitions which annoys me, too analytical of social settings instead of just enjoying them I guess.
>>8076478
lmao have to go sideways to get in the door.
>>8076375
wtf is a 'high literary status' ?
and why does achieving it relieve one of their ignorance?
>>8076432
since you posted, what exactly qualifies you of this status? my mistake if you were just being polite and responding to op, but i am highly curious as to what exactly it is that you do that is of 'high literary status'. desu your description of it reads like how anyone would describe the uniqueness of their respective field when compared to those that just know of it.
but how does that translate to status?
>>8076752
oh wait wtf dude. being a grad student = high literary status?
>>8076814
I agree with you, I was just trying to give the semblance of being fair and balanced.
>>8076375
What about you OP, are you high?
>>8076862
keeps the fatties away
>>8076667
hey brother
i have no way to say as i'm not familiar with sam harris at all, looking at the promo video for 'waking up' it seems that /lit/'s gaze is set much lower than his. his other stuff just seems uninteresting new-atheism judging by titles/descriptions
>>8076957
well, yeah. only people that can go in sideways is ones without huge bellies. but there is nobody going in there straight ahead unless you had no frame on your body.
>>8076805
you idiot realise that's a pantry door
ffs /lit/ you're meant to be the smart board
>>8077134
maybe toilet
anyway shut up about the door
door's not real
>>8076375
>Who here achieved a high literary status yet? Or feels like it to some degree?
Neither, but I'd really like to share a conclusion that I've arrived at after having read a fair amount of literature, and I'd like to hear some anons' opinions about it.
Literature is exclusively written from a point of vanity; however, it is the presentation of this vanity that can make a piece of writing good. So far, I've been able to create two categories--and just to be frank, I prefer the latter over the former--Idealism and Entertainment. In idealistic writing, I've found writers who (vainly believing their correct) believe certain things to be Right and True and pump out a good story in which they express what exactly those beliefs are. In idealistic writing, there is a clear, obvious bias at play, but this isn't solely a disparagement. A writers' bias can sometimes be a helluva a lot of fun to read about, and sometimes if the writer's talented, the stories used as stages for their biases are damn good ones. However the vanity that leads them to believing that they're right can sometimes be so heavily poured that the work becomes an aggravatingly colorless bitchlist. And eventually, after having read enough of them, bitchlists cease to be both great opportunities to empathize with/understand other people and expose one's self to the woes of humanity. They just turn into opinion pieces from zines
Writing created for the purpose of Entertainment is also laden with vanity, for its creation is also completed with a good share of Idealism, but the Idealism isn't in anyway overpowering or all that pungent. Writing in this category is created to entertain, so the merit of the story will always take precedence over the writer'' bias. This isn't to suggest that there is any less bias, but rather that the story is so compelling that what bias its writer inserts into it is more cleverly inserted. The bias of the writers, their ideals is the platform upon which these stories are written, and the story must be a damn good one for this to work. However, Entertaining writing has its faults as well. If there is no bias, and no sense of ideals then the work is somewhat less nourishing to the mind and soul, and eventually writing of this sort can become as bland as watching a bad comedy.
I should add that more often than not, writers who right Idealistically believe that what they believe is beneficial to humanity, but their hands are always too heavy. What I've found is that writers who have grown and lived and loved and hurt and prayed are able to produce good works which go beyond either category, and rather than writing with Idealism for humanity, they write with humility, hope, and love for the Individual, for their reader.
>>8077156
cela est une fenêtre
>>8077318
you should probably begin by explaining why you believe all literature is written from a point of vanity first
also you end with claiming that some can write with humility, hope, and love for the individual but i am confused. are they still writing from a point of vanity in doing so?
maybe i'm just being autistic but perhaps you structured your argument wrong, in that you believe there are two types of 'writing' : idealistic and entertainment, with your thesis being that they both ultimately arrive from a point of a vanity, yet you also believe it is possible to transcend this?
i know i still haven't really dealt with the content of your argument but its so jarringly organized. i mean if what you arrive to is that your initial point is possible to forgo then why even state a point of vanity to be apriori to writing? you've turned it into a binary argument yet then end it with the possibility of a hierarchical solution.
>>8077382
read hegel
>>8077398
if you would be so polite as to explain to me what he says that pertains to the discussion i would be much grateful, thanks.
