State your case
>>8142552
Faulkner is sexier and also less gay; therefore, he is better.
Sup, femingay motherfaulkners. Any of you interested in licking on my ballzack and sucking my dickens? You can play around with it in your mouth as if it were a tolsToy.
Hemingway? more like .... femingay.
Help i did too much pot
>>8142552
Hemingway is a good writer because he is an honest writer.
Faulkner succeeds at the art of the written word because he bursts forth with what you might call honesty, not because he is talented simply and not because he has been well studied and not for the sake of artifice not even in such a way as Southern writers have pretended to burst forth with honesty for so many generations prior but for the sake of his human heart.
le corncob man vs le bull man
both are gimmicky faggots
>>8142578
wow did you just... wow
Absalom, Absalom is theoretically my favorite book by either author, because of the idea of history as myth, but in practice I can't keep my interest once Faulkner starts reaching peak-Faulkner. On the other hand, the Sound and the Fury is actually one of my favorite books, so I'm gonna go with Faulkner over Hemingway, since I prefer him both in theory and in practice.
>>8142597
Yes, yes he did.
Love them both. Despite being compared so often, they're incredibly different. American literature is better for the both of them. Intruder in the Dust is fantastic. The Snows of Kilimanjaro is one of the best story collections ever published.
>>8142578
Thanks, anon. This gold is why I keep coming back to /lit/ every night.
>>8142600
>theoretically
>in theory
what the literal fuck am I reading
Faulkner wrote about the pain and misery of a decadent society. Hemingway wrote about the pain and suffering of being a man losing his manhood.
>>8142635
me being a disjointed writer that will never come close to winning a nobel prize?
>>8142578
Are you going to thank us for the gold?
>>8142638
>Hemingway wrote about the pain and suffering of being a man losing his manhood.
Other than The Sun Also Rises that isn't really a prevalent theme in his works.
>>8142638
so Faulkner wrote about society and Hemingway wrote about the individual? coo
>>8142646
>Santiago doesn't catch fish
>it's his male obligation to catch fish
what are you even on about literally
>>8142669
That is a very self serving and unusual interpretation of that book, anon. The Old Man and the Sea gets a lot of analysis in regards to the struggles of man but masculinity isn't really touched upon at all.
>>8142669
That's a rather trendy, shallow reading innit?
>>8142681
>responds to post touching on masculinity
>"masculinity isn't touched upon at all"
>>8142701
>I have dogshit reading comprehension and can't into distinctions
You know that you were wrong, you're just being a dense semantic playing smartass now. You can go waste someone else's time with that shit.
>>8142707
*Dyke McGraw, Ph.D.
sorry
>>8142669
The book absolutely never states that he's catching the fish out of an explicit "male obligation". Did you even read it?
>>8142733
Henry V absolutely never states that he's struggling with "navigating his public and private identities". Did you even read it?
>>8142733
>explicit
there's your problem.
(I'm pointing to the fact that you're autistic)
>>8142742
Not seeing an argument.
>you're autistic
Ebin. Does book discussion always make you this mad?
>>8142747
Not pointing out the argument that I missed.
Actual book *discussion* never makes me any mad.
>>8142751
You were supposed to, I don't know, point out a passage or motif in the book that related to masculinity. I made it clear that I think it's apparent that there is no such reference or implication to that specific subject, so the burden of proof is on you.
Anything is better than "no, you're wrong. fuck you.", which I find quite ironic considering that you're now trying to take the high horse by claiming you're generally in "real" literary discussion that don't make you angry. I think you're just a person that gets devastated when people disagree with you. Sad.
>>8142733
No, it doesn't but Santiago goes through the whole ordeal as a way of proving his value to a society that seems him invaluable since he is a weak old man. He does not have a male obligation to catch the fish since he is old man, but it is because of that he feels obliged to do so.
>>8142569
LOL
>>8142778
This. And I'd still also argue that it's an exclusively "male" obligation since in the story there don't seem to be quite too many females fishing.
>>8142768
>You were supposed to, I don't know, point out a[n explicit] passage or motif in the book that related to masculinity.
How is this a valid argument when discussing Hemingway, though? Especially bearing in mind >le iceberg maymay?
>>8142578
I don't get it
>>8142552
Wow what a scholarly thread
>High School-tier bullshit discussions
>>/trash/
>>8142794
yeah but you do though
>>8142792
IT'S LIKE A ICE BERGCUZ LOTS OF ITITS UNDER THE WATER LIKEU CAN'T SEE
>>8142834
...Woah...
What if we were *all* icebergs, though... when you think about it...
