/lit/ - Literature

>>11097935
No.

>>11097935
>pretentious
boring, overused critique

>>11097941
>responding to particulars within the post instead of its argument
boring, overused critique

>>11097935
no, just kill yourself

>>11097935
You don't have a mind to change. Go play.

try Pnin

>>11097935
why though? you're totally right!

>>11097935
Nabokov. Dislike him. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up. A non-entity. Means absolutely nothing to me. Awful.

>>11099648
Okay. Sad. Please leave. Bye. Mr President.

>>11097935
Try Pnin, if you haven't.

>>11097947
That is a part of his argument, though. OP's critique of Nabokov's writing skills is a function of Nabokov's pretentiousness writing style.

Pale Fire is a phenomenal commentary on the roles of subject and author.

>>11097935
>dismissing Nabokov
>calling anyone else a pretentious twat
>change my mind

No, you keep your middlebrow opinion. It'll alert others to your mediocrity.

>>11097935
just because an author is pretentious doesn't mean that they also can't be a master of their field.

he wasn't pretentious, just a genius writer who didn't restrain himself with any false modesty
he also doesn't seem like an asshole at all from the interviews i've seen, maybe he just looks like that in photographs because it's the sharp image he wanted to project

if you think Lolita isn't worth reading you're just an idiot and no one can help that

>>11097935
Lolita is one of the all-time great works of literature.

>>11097935
>Change my mind.

>>11097935
>twat

Shoo shoo slimey limey
Reminder the "best" writer Britain could come up with in the last 100 years was fucking Orwell

>>11097935
Galileo was also a pretentious twat who called Aristotelians retards and made fun of them in his letters with Copernicus yet he invented the modern scientific method.

>>11100299
but he manifestly wasn't a genius, that's the whole point. nabokov was a very good writer, perhaps even an excellent writer, a B+ player for sure but he definitely wasn't a genius. he's a lot like clement greenberg if clem had insisted on keeping up his paintng instead of writing about others' work (which he was much better at)

>>11100357
>orwell
that's a funny way to spell "alasdair gray"

I love that people hate him because he actually had his own taste and wasn't a canon slave like your typical /lit/fag

>>11100560
he wrote one of the all time greatest books, what the fuck does it take for you to count someone as a genius writer?
seems like your definition of "genius" is just a little too strict and exalted

>>11097935
>His prose is his only redeeming quality
LOL

>>11099648
Did Céline actually say this or not?

What the fuck does "pretentious" even mean?

>>11101658
like engaging with ideas requiring consideration beyond your mental capacity

>>11101686
isnt that 'learning'

>write normal prose
>egh this is boring
>write beautiful prose and style
>have readers and lit teachers eating out of your hand
>people will just call it pretentious

How do you win? I want to write stunningly beautiful prose and not be called pretentious.

>>11101762
>>people will just call it pretentious
who cares about what plebs think? nabokov certainly didn't

is there anything worse than when someone starts talking shit about /yourguy/?

>>11101762
set standards for yourself that you have to meet. There is literally no single writer who is universally liked, especially since modernity.

>>11101762
Post some of your sentences please. I want to see.

>>11101762
If anyone calls you pretentious just call them a pleb. Also learn French

>>11101897

In the greentext I wasn't referring to myself, it was a hypothetical scenario/what happens to Nabokov. I can't write at all yet.

>>11101992
>it was a hypothetical scenario/what happens to Nabokov
>I can't write at all yet.
clearly.

>>11102734

Rude.

Pale Fire is one of the greatest novels of all time, and nothing else had been structured like it at the time. I don't care if you can't get into his prose or you think he's pretentious or whatever else you want to complain about because he hurt your feelings by shitting on your favourite author, he will always deserve recognition for Pale Fire.

Nabakov was an excellent writer and had a deep understanding of literature that all of us can only hope to half match

>>11101686
>art

anybody got a nabokov chart? i bought king, queen, knave and Ada and wondering where to start. Ive only read Lolita

>>11097947
>not getting he was reviewing you in the spirit of nabokov
heheeh u didnt get it

>>11103489

What was that deep understanding of Literature?

>>11104909
cunny sells