[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/lit/ - Literature

Discussion of Literature

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 1 per post.


Liberate tuteme ex Excelsior!

File: 1445572908905.jpg (2.33 MB, 1928x2076, 482:519, l-ron-hubbard.jpg)

 No.7155

Hey /lit/, who is the most overrated author who still gets lauded in literary circles?

For my money, toss-up between Henry James and Raymond Carver. What's your vote?

nb4 John Green/Stephen King we already know they're overrated.

pic semi-related

 No.7156

Cormack McCarthy


 No.7177

>>7156

Care to elaborate? Is it the vulgarity or? No Country and The Road were very well done. Still haven't finished Blood Meridian, but that's the one I hear the most complaints about


 No.7178

Hemingway. I feel like he stumbled into fame by committing suicide, so all the academics now love him. And he's dry.


 No.7186

stephen king is not overrated.

literary circles don't love him that much, he just sells, or used to sell a lot.

he's not that bad if you ask me, sometimes even great.

and i think that outside scientology i doubt that L. Ron gets much love by critics, or public…


 No.7196

Probably Jane Austen. I feel like all her books are basically the same. I also can't help but remember my senior English teacher in high school saying "But if Jane Austen isn't part of the canon, then there won't be any women on the list."

I also feel like J. D. Salinger is, if not exactly overrated, at least a misunderstood, by which I mean the people who decided highschoolers need to read Catcher in the Rye don't get Catcher in the Rye.


 No.7201

>>7177

It makes me really angry that he doesn't resolve plotlines in his books and they never seem to have a theme besides post-modernist genre deconstruction bullshit.


 No.7204

>>7186

He's a major figure of the golden age of hardcore Asimovian polemics.


 No.7210

>>7204

honestly his only non scientology work i heard about is battlefied earth and mostly on the account of the movie and if it's a faithful adaptation it's a shit book.

he's no Asimov.


 No.7483

>>7177

What was well done about them?


 No.7496

>>7196

Her last book (Persuasion) is a bit different and anticipates Virginia Woolf.


 No.7502

>>7204

And that's only because he wrote thousands of pages. He still holds the record for most published works. He was fucking crazy, but I do admire his ability to just keep writing.


 No.9090

Stephen King is shit

J.D. Salinger: shit

James Joyce's own modernist pretensions have turned him into a dinosaur

Virginia Woolf: muh vagina

Virgina Woolf's proxies (Atwood): muh vaginas

Emily Dickinson: muh vagina

Walt Whitman's philosophasting destroyed his legacy; his America has utterly vanished, thank god.

Henry Thoreau: a miserable mediocrity and wisdom writer. Thoreau and his ilk mark the coming of the American bourgeoisie.

Herman Melville. One of Thoreau's contemporaries, a Christian bigot and moralizing extremist. As part of the coming American bourgeoisie, Melville surpasses Thoreau by epitomizing our contemporary SJW's in 19th century form, a man well before his time for sure; kill whitey (the White Whale).

Ralph Waldo Emerson. Emerson couldn't decide between abolitionism and the reality of the Nigger, so he paid lip-service to abolitionists while at the same time distancing him by waxing sentimental about "Individualism". You might say he was a proto-cuckservative.

Don DeLillo's Underworld is a piece of shit, his early books are far better.

Lord Byron was simply a shitty poet.

Percy Shelly: the English parallel of Thoreau. We're at once supposed to believe in revolution and "non violence", which is to say he was a typical coward and English muddlehead, and the negrophilia is pretty disgusting. The poetry can be great but, as with Whitman, it is too often muddled by formal philosophasting. Generally all late poetry in history is shit.

John Keats didn't sufficiently understand what he was saying when he said "truth is beauty". Keats was a typical dilettante, hence his utterly naïve, if not bourgeois view of nature.

Sylvia Plath. Complete shit, truly a product of her age. In the 60's, it was fashionable for feminists to flock to "poetry", ironically confirming the sexual segregation of culture engendered by Americanism, the very thing they allegedly fought. It was an ephemeral affectation and consequentially produced a ton of garbage. Plath is now deified because she confirmed liberal pretensions by 1) having a vagina 2) picking up a pen and 3) writing about lampshades

William Faulkner was too artsy even by modernist standards, and he was a traitor. His worst book was stylistically a wreck but was political and therefore satisfied the critics, while his best book was pure art-for-art's sake nonsense. Very inconsistent writer and not nearly as great as the canon says. But why does its say it then? He loved niggers.

Tennyson was a stilted Victorian court poet and pretty uninspiring, the academics are right.

Ezra Pound: one of the worst examples of American dilettantism. Literalizing the literality of modernism is a sure way to destroy poetry.

Wallace Stevens. He's part of a second wave of American modernism (dilettantism) that apparently didn't get the message from the first half. His so called "paganism" is fluty-to-do whimsical emoting, an inverted Americanized Christianism that wrecks his poetic aspirations.

I can think of some more but I'm tired now.


 No.9097

Paulo "Facebook Mottos" Coelho


 No.9105

>>9097

is he, though?

depending on who you ask, the reaction can be very negative.


 No.9111

>>9105

Maybe he isn't anymore, but like 2 or 3 years ago, he was everywhere in Europe


 No.9138

>>9111

i don't know. i read the alchemist some 15 years ago and i thought is was meh at the time, and looking back came to the realization that it's shit.


 No.9140

>>9138

Facebook was full of his quotes, and bookstores where flooded with his work


 No.9148

>>9140

>>9140

>Facebook was full of his quotes

i wouldn't know. i don't use it and i know only one person that sends "inspirational" phrases every now and then.

i guess somebody must be buying them books.


 No.9224

>>7177

I've only recently started The Road but does it pick up? I'm not terribly far in but it seems so pretentiously distant for the sake of some vacuous ambience.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]