What does /lit/ think of naturalism and realism?
Naturalism<<<<<Realism<Modernism.
(actually I don't have an opinion, I just wanted to bump)
>>7324658
Its depressing.
>>7324658
>realism
>look at me, I'm a perfectly normal person doing normal things. i might deviate slightly from the norm, but my story's being told thousands of times over. now read about it for thousands of dense, glacially-paced pages.
>naturalism
>holy fuck! look at how dirty and miserable those labourers are! their lives are a document of their era. now read about it for thousands of dense, glacially-paced pages.
Also, there's a dried wine stain glimmering in a beam of afternoon sunlight on an oak wood table somewhere in there.
>>7324658
>unnecessary "ism"s
You know, this is quite like when critics make up silly new genres for music.
Ayn Rand BTFOs it in the Romantic Manifesto.
>>7324955
>Also, there's a dried wine stain glimmering in a beam of afternoon sunlight on an oak wood table somewhere in there.
Underrated post.
>>7324658
>What does /lit/ think of naturalism and realism?
It's hardly Art is it.
>>7324658
You came to the wrong neighbourhood, we're decadents here.
>>7324955
Dubs confirm, however, lets be honest, there are people who are able to write realism exceptionally well even if you personally might dislike the aesthetic.
For example, Stoner.
Is it anti-escapism?
