/lit/ - Literature

In the 21st century we have this thread.

>>16628938
>how great artists could be created again?
We have to be the great artists desu. You list names, but there were <200 artists in total across the various arts (lit, music, visual) in the 19th century. There are probably ~500 some regular posters on /lit/ rn. If half of those could create works of art on the level of Tolstoy, or Goethe, or Wagner, we'd make it. We can restore the arts, we just have to work at it.

>>16628948
Revamping art in the modern age would take dissociation uncommon to the plugged in nature of culture

>>16628938
All greatness is only measured retroactively. We'll be long dead before we see what the greats of our time were. Also, we still have eighty years until the century is finished, dipshit.

>>16628948
I am doing my part by writing the great novel of this century. You guys can be the Edgar Allan Poes and Nabokovs and McCarthys of this generation

>>16628957
There are 7+ Billlion people, and we need ~200. Finding such people isn't the problem, creating the art is.

>>16628948
>but there were <200 artists in total across the various arts
what the fuck are you talking about

>>16628970
Every mote of sentience, a tumble of cosmic die that come up genius at fixed percentile? Come anon,,, surely you don't believe that ..

>>16628960
These people were famous for being great artists. They were not obscure people in their moms basement who were found 100 years later.

>>16628983
He thinks he knows more than he does anon leave him be and in two years he'll look back and cringe a little

>>16628938
>Dostoevsky, Balzac, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Turgenev, Maupassant, Chekov, Zola, Dickens, Dumas, Goethe, Hugo, Lermontov, Melville, Keats, Proust, Stendhal. In music there was Beethoven, Wagner, Haydn, Mahler, Bizet, Brahms, Chopin, Schubert, Lizst, Mendelssohn, Berlioz, Bellini, Prokofiev, Puccini, Bruckner, Rossini.

No one reads or listens to these people anymore because their art is shit. 'Timelessness' of art is a massive cope to keep irrelevant products in a position of cultural strength because the metaphysics in which they were conceived was eclipsed by something much more profound and truer to humanity that it appears invisible.

>>16628992
We'll see. Mark my words, you will see an artistic growth of sorts in the coming years.

>>16628995
>no one listens to beethoven

>>16629004
It's obvious bait

>>16629004
Beethoven is the Shakespeare of the music world

>>16628992
Not an argument

>>16629005
You mean I was set up?

>>16629007
The undisputed GOAT?

>>16629010
yes

>>16629007
Beethoven is not grossly overrated though

>>16629016
>billy shakes is overrated

Maybe /v/ would be better suited for you.

>>16628938
The needed psychological foundation needed to create great art have been erdicated in exchange for foundations that promote primeval comsumerism. It could also be said we have exhausted the vast marjority of possible expressions and styles of art that is possible for us as humans to do, inferring that we need to "evolve" to create more, so essentially anything else done by us modern humans today, is just recycled or more of the same.

>>16628995
Most if not all of those composers you listed are still relevant today, if not as major part of classical music concert, then at least as relaxation or study music.

>>16628938
The psychological foundation needed to create great art have been erdicated in exchange for foundations that provide a more hospitable enviroment for a kind of "primeval consumerism". It could also be said we have exhausted the vast marjority of possible expressions and styles of art that is possible for us as humans to do, inferring that we need to "evolve" to create more. So essentially any other art done by us modern humans today, is just recycled or more of the same.

>>16628995
ahhh yes truley wagner has been eclipsed by "gucci gang"

>>16628938
There needs to be an amalgamation between all three.

Part divine and anti-nihilism, part progress and with a goal in mind, and part self doubt and anti-dogmatism

>>16629049
What are you talking about man

>>16629035
using classical as background music completely kills its intention especially since only very slow and mellow pieces are used

>>16629035
Cope concerts and pseuds

>>16629049
Everyone has been eclipsed by Morricone.

>>16629040
>The psychological foundation needed to create great art have been erdicated in exchange for foundations that provide a more hospitable enviroment for a kind of "primeval consumerism".
I've been having similar thoughts, but what was that psychological foundation in the first place? At first I was thinking maybe it's due to fact that we lack the financial support of the arts that the nobles provided, but surely that's at most only a part of the story.

Aphex twin makes good music. Listen to druqks

>>16629163
Here is the ableton = beethoven guy

>>16629166
I fully expected this reply. Your repulse toward programmed music is retarded

>>16629120
You need an aristocracy to have aristocratic art. You can create an explosion of creativity by replacing the aristocracy with a more open free-for-all bourgeoisie, but you are just "burning up energy" that was accumulated in this aristocratic world, it's not self-replenishing, it just destroys the whole foundations of its own existence.

There was this promise of communism and the progressive left in general, that if we went through this process of destroying social limitations to the human spirit we would all come out the other side being basically aristocrats. But as far as I can see it has completely failed. The most clear and mundane example that really exemplifies this belief at its purest is that you don't force any discipline onto kids, their creativity will just flourish and without any restrains all kids will basically become natural artists rather than their soul be killed by the constricting world of the adults. I think we can empirically say that this wager has completely backfired, if you don't apply any discipline and skill direction to kids what you basically get is a world that is a permanent kindergarten and the greatest art they are able to create is painting things in random colors and write empty heartwarming platitudes that only a 5 year old could take seriously.

Just have to observe any woman's march or "diversity office" and honestly analyze why the aesthetics and decoration look exactly the same as a room decorated for 5 year old kindergarten kids

filmmakers is where the artists are these days

>>16628948
you named the three greatest geniuses of the 19th century and expect that any neet on this site can come even close to them?

>>16629172
I'm not repulsed it's just delusional to even compare them to the great composers.

>>16629176
name one (1) high art movie from the last 10 years

>>16629176
Film isn't good now lol

>>16629174
Completely agree with you anon, though unfortunately I don't see aristocracy coming back.

>>16629184
Compare them in what way? I'm not going to argue that he competes with fucking classical composers on every level, but if you can't bring yourself to see anything as valuable in that music, you might be a bit close minded.
Certainly, if you are looking for a modern artist that rivals those greats in such a direct manner, you will be disappointed, because those greats are very much a product of their environment.

>>16629228
>because those greats are very much a product of their environment.
I know that's what I'm asking about in the OP

>>16629236
Are there great artists living today? No? Do they have be 'comparable' to fucking bach to be great?
I wont disagree that art (as a whole) has undergone an awful transition into the corrupted, sick mess that it is now, but there is absolutely no need to place such a hard line between the two sides. You are just making yourself more likely to shy away from anything fresh and beautiful that is a product of OUr environment, as fucked at it is.
Honestly, in the OP you sound like a dumb cunt

>>16629220
I think the only way we will see art ever again is if we have true fragmentation and the world is allowed to split into separate populations doing their own thing. So basically ending globalization.

I think this is currently impossible in the US and in the other countries part of the american empire, self-segregation (by any criteria) is strictly not allowed and as soon as you are remotely successful you will be legislated, homogenized and colonized out of existence. The only current possibility of cultural separatism is if you are completely inoffensive, like the Amish, but I expect there may be some more openings as the bureaucracy of the empire becomes more and more rusty and useless.

>>16629312
Why kid yourself about whether they are great or not? Just say they are enjoyable and leave it at that.

>>16629325
Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for your insightful replies anon.

>>16629345
It seems that you have the perverse idea that no modern art is trancendent. Are you on the spectrum?

>>16629360
You find Aphex Twin to be transcendent. You have no argument.

I would say,when everybody is an artist,no one is.Everyone wants to create,to be original,but mere skill and work does not create art.It requires dedication ,talent and being demanding of oneself.Moreover,in the oversocialized climate of the 21st century,most potential or promising artists are never discovered due to either a reclusive nature or lack of connections

>>16629365
My argument is that your standard for trancendent art is autistic enough that nothing can qualify unless it fits into your dumb narrative. I would never claim that aphex is as great as any classical composer, but at least there is something there, some relief after wading through so much trash. Some people are surely mistaken about him, so the bait is understandable

>>16629385
No I understand that people think he is a genius of theory I just don't think there is any substance there and I do find transcendence in modern non-classical music but that doesn't mean I would rate it highly.

>>16629394
Well I have to disagree. Could you give an example of something modern that you think has substance?

>>16629400
Have One on Me

>>16629383
Deviantart was a good intention in getting artists closer to public and paying customers, but what happened is what you mentioned, membership was open to everyone and soon the site became a joke known more for embarrassing crap, while the actually good artist still struggled for attention.

>>16629411
I would need to listen to more perhaps, but I'm not hearing anything very inventive here, in either the composition or instrumentation. The melodies are particularly trash.

>>16629438
Contrarian but I knew it was coming when I hurt your feelings

>>16628938
we're only 19 years into the 21st century

>>16629445
Do you think that album is good?

>>16628991
Literally not true for all of them, Schubert was unknown and only Schumann revived him and made him popular decades later. Stop bullshitting.

>>16629455
The fact that you have never listened to one of the most popular folk musicians of our time just shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Are you interested in music at all?

>>16629400
ricardo bofill buildings are good

>>16629464

>>16629459
When I listen to music that I dislike, I don't make note of it. Being 'clued in' to culturally relevant work is also a worthless attitude to me.

>>16629464
>>16629468

>>16629472
based.Imagine sacrificing your artistic worldview due to peer pressure

>>16629472
You kinda sound like you're on the spectrum now

>>16629464
>>16629468
>>16629473
This one is good because of its classicism, but all his other buildings look like literal hellholes.

>>16629481
Contrarian but I knew it was coming when I hurt your feelings

>>16629480
You mean not having any knowledge of music beyond what he hears on spotify?

>>16629486
I think you should listen to some more music before you talk about it.

>>16629483
even that one has some nice parts, but yeah i wouldn't live in it

>>16629483
and other good ones

>>16629507

>>16629499
>people dont like thing I like ,so those people are dumb
you dont even offer a reason I should like you just insult

>>16629483
>>16629501
>>16629507
>>16629510
>commieblocks are art

>>16629519
only one of those is a commie block

>>16629511
It's not about him not liking it it's about him not knowing who she is. It just shows that he has no musical knowledge. It's like saying your opinion about rock matters but you never heard of The Beatles. I think he might be a teenager

>>16629519
it's not that bad for a low budget building

>>16629519
I very literally called his commieblock a hellhole, though I admit his classicist works are quite nice, which goes to show modernism ruins talent while classicism makes it flourish.

>>16629178
Yes. Someone has to do it. It might as well be you.

The art form is a bit "dated" no? People moved on. Hence why the greatest directors were from the 20th century because film as an art allowed for more experimenting. 21st century is vidya and vidya related things grandpa. Some retard from the 23rd century is probably making a post listing vidya from this century. Time moves on. Just be happy we live in an era where we can enjoy from a large pool of great works.

>>16629575
there's not one single art videogame though

>>16629575
videogames are created by nerds, and nerds cannot be artists

>>16629577
love killer7 and drakengard

>>16629623
both look like average chinese cartoons?

>look at all these artists that the critics and academia told me I must like! Why don’t we have any of those anymore????
Lmao anon just wait until the end of the century and some new critics will come along and tell you who to like again.

>>16629647
yes. if you had to find what kind of poetry and art the 21st century had to offer, the closest thing to it would be anime

>>16629577
I've been playing Cube Escape these days, and the surreal theme makes me think that even if it's not entirely art, it's definitely somewhere up there.

>>16629530
I'm not convinced that I should need to be familiarized with this folk artist in order to have enough of a foundation from which to speak about music. Stop with the retarded assumptions.

>>16629653
not really, all anime is just naive neo-romantic garbage

>>16628938
We have PewDiePie

>>16629656
You obviously don't have a foundation you're just a EDM teen who is mad that I shit on ableton musicians.

I think OP has a great post except that Beethoven is the most overrated hack of all composers. Yes, he has some good stuff in there but his average is meh tier at best.

There, thread derailed. Come at me bro!

>>16629662
Nah you can shit on edm ableton musicians all you want, but that evidently is not Aphex twin.

>>16629672
Then why did you post him because you were comparing him to Wagner?

>>16629665
>>16628938

On a serious note though: i believe the easily accessible entertainment and quick fixes that tevhnology offers has shortened our attention spans and made prolonged endeavours less likely to be properly lauded and rewarded. Second: all the good stuff is taken. Most stories have been written. For something new to come up there needs to be a fundamental change in the world or the societt. Ok fuck me i gotta head back to work. But i had/have a point!

>>16629675
I get it. Classical composers real good. Maybe you should go back and read my posts before getting your straw out

>>16628938
>conveniently skipping over the 20th century and comparing 100 years of art in retrospect with the last 20 years to make your le wrong generation point

>>16629163
I heard the piece Aphex Twin of Richard James carefully: I think it would be very helpful if he listens to my work "Song of the Youth," which is electronic music, and a young boy's voice singing with himself. Because he would then immediately stop with all these post-African repetitions, and he would look for changing tempi and changing rhythms, and he would not allow to repeat any rhythm if it was varied to some extent and if it did not have a direction in its sequence of variations.

>>16629693
>uh but what about dis guy who make me feel good doesn't mean he should be on da big boi list
If this isn't what you were trying to say then no one gives a shit because it's not relevant to the post.

>>16629710
20th century is when the decline started which eventually brought us to this point we are at now dumb fuck.

>>16629718
so, I guess you got the straw out

>>16629723
I dont believe you've read a lot if any 20th century literature if you genuinely think that.

>>16628938
Shift in the ruling classes. Aristocrats actually cared about art and cultivating good taste. The bourgeoisie don't care about funding the arts, they just want you to consume their products, a lot of which happen to be trashy music and braindead cgi packed movies. The result is that serious art is now highly academic and no one outside that circle knows or cares about it.

>>16629742
I don't think you have read a lot before the 20th century if you genuinely think that.

>>16628938
the art of the 20th century is both more imaginative and more varied and masterful. especially the music and literature. the 21st century has just begun and though it seems the "canon" is on the decline, many great works will still be made but will go on unrecognized. labels like post modernizm dont accuretly describe the large variety of stuff we have.

>>16629765
>the art of the 20th century is both more imaginative and more varied and masterful. especially the music and literature.
nice bait
>e but will go on unrecognized.
Why do you think this?

>>16629776
>Why do you think this?
because people dont even know of the great works of the 20th century and say
>nice bait

we liked putting the works of the past on a pedestal because of their legendary status and now there are far more great works to the point where we cant put all of them on a pedestal. there are too many to even find.

>>16629803
Go on post your npr list

>>16629325
>that pic
Do you believe "we" are in late-stage decline and perhaps not fully grasping it?

>>16629185
Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives

>>16629820
what

>>16629852
Look at that list in the 2010s and then look at the list in 1960s. Why can't we have that back :(

>>16629869
Your list of "great" works

>>16629820
check Bloom's chaotic age (and his comment at the start of that list)
http://sonic.net/~rteeter/grtbloom.html

>>16629890
Someone should of told him chaotic age was better than all the other ones

>>16629924
I dont think he particularly thought one age was better than the others. His chaotic age list sure is the longest of the 4 ages if thats any measure.

>>16629934
Gotta throw everything at the wall and see what sticks

>>16629871
I wouldn't dismiss the 2010s group just because you haven't heard of them. I agree that in the 60s the mainstream/successful movies coincided more with what is considered "good art" as opposed to now. But that's a separate issue about what the masses consume nowadays and not necessarily about a lack of talented filmmakers.

>>16630004
I've watched them you dumb fuck Uncle Boonme is literally on the Criterion Channel

>>16629174
Your premise is decent (albeit unfalsifiable), but your conclusion of blaming communism and leftism is ridiculous and probably in bad faith.
The hegemonic system of the world, having won the economic and cultural wars, is capitalism. Aristocratic art was elitist and had no profit motive, and that is what allowed it to flourish. Capitalist art is pandering because of its profit motive, fragmented because of cultural dispersion, and unambitious because of the death of ideology.
If you think the solution is "disciplining kids" you are literally Jordan Peterson-tier.

>>16629876
ye this is a good list and "chaotic age" is a good descriptor >>16629890 (thank u)
but there still is a tendency to create a canon and a lot of lesser known, less influential but still great unique and experimental works are overlooked. of course he couldnt have read everything but its still a good list.

the ratio of good to jibber is about the same thruought history imo. theres just too much noise now cuz population and distribution

>>16628938
t. dialeticslet

>>16630060
Postmodernism is the main reason for the decline so it is the fault of leftists.

>>16628991
many great artists died in poverty and their work was only recognized after their death. it's not like there aren't famous writers or musitians now

>>16630060
i'm not blaming leftism / communism, just giving my opinion that their predictions failed, their prediction being that going through modernity / capitalism would basically catapult humanity into a Promethean era, that you can destroy traditional human rules and communities and after we go through that process more real and authentic relationships would arise. it turns out the destruction is real and not just a process of overcoming, and once you burn down institutions they usually don't grow back up again

i think the only way that prediction can be saved is if you believe, like Nick Land, that what gets emancipated is nothing human, but the means of production themselves

the "disciplining kids" was just an example of burning down ties and structures that put down and don't allow humans to flourish, could have been many different examples like "removing standards in art", "open borders", "abolish the family", "multicultural enrichment", "diverse metropolitan areas"

to be clear, i am not necessarily against any of those things above, i'm just saying that the promise of those things were an explosion of energy and creativity, and i'd say what they really produce is "boring grey goo"

>>16630151
another example, even gay rights have turned gays and the gay world boring as fuck, when their world had always been arguably a source of a creative underworld

>>16630060
>Aristocratic art was elitist and had no profit motive, and that is what allowed it to flourish
arguably, that's not true, during most of artists were doing commissioned work paid by aristocrats, governments and religious institutions, it was just that those people and institutions cared about the art being actually good

you may be right if you are speaking only about some post-renaissance art currents though

>>16628938
You might have noticed that the post-modern ethos is a result of extreme background noise levels.

>>16628995
based retard
Dostoyevsky is, to this date, the best literature I've ever read.

>>16629325
i'm becoming more and more convinced that we're merely experiencing a little turbulence on the way to high capitalism and this shite is going to carry on for a thousand years

>>16628938
We have Sebald.

>>16629655
Ew

>>16629803
Ay yes, there’s so many masterpieces that you no one can literally name even one. Your logic is brain dead

>>16630004
Retard

>>16628983
I meant %2.00

>>16631782
No you didnt

>>16629577
Bloodborne and Minecraft

There probably is a modern Dostoevsky, Balzac, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Turgenev, Maupassant, Chekov, Zola, Dickens, Dumas, Goethe, Hugo, Lermontov, Melville, Keats, Proust, Stendhal. In music there was Beethoven, Wagner, Haydn, Mahler, Bizet, Brahms, Chopin, Schubert, Lizst, Mendelssohn, Berlioz, Bellini, Prokofiev, Puccini, Bruckner, Rossini, it's just that everyone is too focused on 19th century figures such as Dostoevsky, Balzac, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Turgenev, Maupassant, Chekov, Zola, Dickens, Dumas, Goethe, Hugo, Lermontov, Melville, Keats, Proust, Stendhal. In music there was Beethoven, Wagner, Haydn, Mahler, Bizet, Brahms, Chopin, Schubert, Lizst, Mendelssohn, Berlioz, Bellini, Prokofiev, Puccini, Bruckner, Rossini that they haven't went and found them.

>>16630156
>when their world had always been arguably a source of a creative underworld
What the fuck are you talking about lmao

It’s only been 20 years.

>>16629016
Yes he is lol. Shakespeare on the other hand is appropriately rated.

>>16631948
It's not lookin too good. The first 20 years of the 19th century had some bangers

haha isn't it so weird that the decline of western civilization coincides with the advent of Jewish involvement in our culture haha that's so strange isn't it

>>16632086
No it has no involvement

>>16632175
oh well that's a relief haha glad that's settled I was a little worried haha

>>16630060

SJW leftism is the religion that the capitalist class provides. The poster was arguing in good faith.

>>16628938
>Dostoevsky, Balzac, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Turgenev, Maupassant, Chekov, Zola, Dickens, Dumas, Goethe, Hugo, Lermontov, Melville, Keats, Proust, Stendhal.
All of these suck except Hugo, Goethe, and Keats. Try again, anon.

>>16631892
gays used to do creative shit inbetween obliterating each other assholes rather than campaign for Biden

>>16632360
All of them are great except the three you listed.

>>16632360
Lol imagine outing yourself as a retarded pleb

>>16632360
Keats is ass bro

>>16632211
Jews have been around as long as Western culture has

>>16628938

The "modern" is actually perfectly still, suspended between the Dualism of past and future simultaneously receding, the "postmodern" is actually perfectly progressive in its liberation from said Dualism by incidentally renouncing it, and the "premodern" is actually perfectly delirious in that the straight line between God and Man actually constitutes a perfect distance between them.

>>16628995
Art is timeless, human interests, culture, and intelligence are not. Our interests change, we lose our culture, and cheap, mass-produced and harmful things replace the edifying or at least instructive things of old

>>16632389
Hugo was probably the greatest poet of the 19th century, at least in French. I haven't read Goethe in German so I can't properly judge his stuff, but I enjoyed the translations.
>>16632395
Literary realism was pretty gay. I'm surprised OP listed mostly realist novelists (arguably the most boring literary movement coupled with the most inferior of the literary formats- the novel). Realism was always a gay way of political posturing. Look into the political roots of realism. It stinks to the core and was rotten from the beginning. The only half-decent writer in that movement was Flaubert.
>>16632397
Agree to disagree. He isn't one of my favorites, but I've enjoyed quite a few of his poems.

>>16632874
You’re legit retarded for thinking Proust is a literary realist. You haven’t read any of those writers. KYS

>>16632909
Here is what I said, key word is "mostly":
>I'm surprised OP listed mostly realist novelists
I never said Proust was a literary realist. Learn to read. And properly speaking, he also wasn't really a 19th century writer. His magnum opus was published in the 20th century. Get fucked, retard.

>>16632874
>not even knowing that Leopardi existed
Bury yourself into the ground and never come back, pathetic pseud

The 19th century was life on tutorial mode. Everything was simple and stupid and there were no nightmarish distractions, no 5th generational warfare assaultimg your mind, no endocrine disruptors on every surface, no queers, no commies, no welfare, no income tax, no fiat, no college, no highways, no computer, no phone, no foreigners at the grocery store. Just good old time easy mode simple living that people would kill for today. I spit on every soft bitch author you listed. Anyone here could write that shit if it was the 19th century, but it's not. Their weakness and naivete invalidates all of their work, btw. It's objectively bad and irrelevant. Better off forgotten

>>16633124
That's a nice way of saying that the anglo-french literature that took over the world as if by magic in the 19th century is utter shit. Better to seek in other realms.

>>16632546

They weren't the out-and-out culture masters till after WW2. Let's not make pretend, anon.

>>16628938
They exist, their works just aren't known yet.
>>16628948
Most of those are just shitposters who don't even read desu

>>16633362
>They exist, their works just aren't known yet.
you fucking retarded

>>16629178

>>16628991
Tell that to Melville, who died pretty much like Bartleby did.

>>16632982
I like Leopardi's poetry. Not sure how you got that out of my post, but okay.

>>16628957
The plugged in nature of modern culture will probably beget the art unique to the 21st century.

>>16628938
>In the 19th century we had Dostoevsky, Balzac, Tolstoy, Flaubert, Turgenev, Maupassant, Chekov, Zola, Dickens, Dumas, Goethe, Hugo, Lermontov, Melville, Keats, Proust, Stendhal. In music there was Beethoven, Wagner, Haydn, Mahler, Bizet, Brahms, Chopin, Schubert, Lizst, Mendelssohn, Berlioz, Bellini, Prokofiev, Puccini, Bruckner, Rossini. In the 21st century we have basically nothing even close.
That's nothing. Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope, and Steve Jobs. Now we have no cash, no hope, and no jobs.

>>16628938
Culture is far too fragmented (ironic, given globalization) to produce such a galaxy of lights again.

>>16629325
Cannot a newly homogenous, unified society create altogether new art? That is, art not previously conceivable without the gestalt of unique influences, elements of culture not previously included.

>>16635301
Nice. That is a good one.

>>16629325
the empire hasn't even begun, anon. we are still waiting for a caesar.

>>16629174
So much ideology in one post

>>16635968
i don't have some grand plan though, just many small annoyances regarding common liberal wisdom
>>16635899
a Caesar can't do anything if there's not the human material in place for him to utilize it, a Caesar leading an army of retards, is still an army of retards

>>16628995
Plebian take

>>16629018
Shakespeare fans remind me of muslims. Both think their book (whether folio or quran) has unmatched divine quality. Every word of it is guidance to humanity for all eternity. There was nothing better before it and there shall be none afterwards. It is in its entirety original, that its subject matter never been tackled, and stories it has never been told before. It is not influenced yet it influenced everything after it. You can study one sentence of it for years and still discover new wisdom. It’s true message will never be understood and most of it will remain cryptic esp. to plebians. Its pristine literary quality is a blessing to the world, yet it is written by an illiterate literally who of its time.

>>16629577
>>16629582
Read Heraclitus you dumb idiots.

>>16635393
I will copy that one for social points, please do not sue me.

>>16636276
What has Heraclitus to do with that?

>>16633124
Each time has its own dilemmas. We cannot expect a writer like Tolstoy, because his themes where of a different nature than today's people's problems. The point is eventually that it's impossible to judge current literature from our point of view. Only time will tell what the metaphysical structure of the 21th century is. It's still hard to judge the 20th century for that matter. The further we go back in time the clearer the main metaphysical elements of that time period become, that is if we still have resources from that time. There will be tons of data from the 21th century. Our metaphysical structure seems to be just that, an overflow of data correlated with an increasing importance of processing and interpreting said data. When Tolstoy wrote this wasn't a thing. But his time period was not easy mode. If you actually think that you have some research to do.

>>16629178
NEETs are unironically the kings of this planet

test

>>16636298
He knew that it could very well be and will most likely be that nerds and video games will be regarded as high arts in 3 centuries from now while classical literature could be completely forgotten due to changed cultural imperatives.

>>16636357
have you considered that culture is fake though

>>16628942
fpbp

>>16629061
artworks for this feel?

>muh classical music
Why wouldn't you want to listen to something that captures the spirit of the times instead of living in the past. Obviously the majority of people don't hold the same opinions as you

>>16629184
great composers are shit
it's always the same aimless noodling

>>16628938
I think it's important to remember that everyone you named is encapsulated in a 100 year period. Meanwhile, the 21st century has only been around for a fifth of that, give it time anon, and maybe we'll see great artists again. As far as music goes, we have Kamasi Washington.

>>16638050
we got an avant teen in the house

>>16629575
this
also 'art' is just obsolete terminology for conspicuous consumption
nobody cares
op just want to flex what he naively thinks is 'high culture'
'art' today is the International Space Station, Burj Khalifa, and probably smartphones and supercars

>>16629653
based beyond belief
>>16629660
unbelievably cringe

>>16629679
>Most stories have been written.
and more importantly: no one fucking cares for written stories in this day and age

>>16628948
Everyone here is a brain-fried tard who doesn't have the focus to write a novel on the scale of Dostoevksy

>>16628938
Ive red doujins better than worldclassics

>>16629924
>should of
stop plz

>>16630086
it's always the fault of leftist because conservatives are scared shitless of any change never take any risks
retard

>>16629457
What are you talking about? Beethoven praised Schubert when he was alive, he was definitely not unknown then.

>>16638251
exactly my point thanks for making it

>>16638110
yes and i'm proud of it
meanwhile you're stuck in the past because your brain can't process today's world
you are useless

>>16638318
you're welcome
enjoy your safe space

>>16638321
>today's world

>>16638321
>yes and i'm proud of it
You will grow out of it.

>>16638339
>poorniggers won't understand

>>16628938
>In the 21st century we have basically nothing even close.
We have actual things to do.
The past was a shithole where all anyone had to escape their misery, the hunger, the smell of shit, and the cold, black winters was scripples on paper
Now go fuck yourself you little snotty crybaby
>Everything was better when I was a baaaaby
Fuck you

>>16638416
you sound dumb

>>16638418
Fuck off. Half this shithole board is you pathetic losers wining about the same bullshit. Can you do anything worthwhile? Can you do anything at all except cry and reee and call names?
No. So fuck you.

>>16638431
I don't see you making any posts

>>16638176
agree, anime is cringe

>>16628938
I dunno man. Part of me is hopeful that the great creators of our time are buried beneath a mountain of shit and time will sift them out.

The realist in me however recognizes that improved communication and transportation, coupled with the great democratization of art has made the material prerequisites of creation, insular artistic communities formed by diverse life histories, impossible.

>>16628938
you linearistic time dog
you filthy dialectical rat
stop looking at mirrors like highways

>>16628938
It's easy to evaluate posterity because the past is frozen in time and a given. Contemporary events have not yet solidified into an intelligible pattern.

>>16638608
>posterity
Eh, I mean not posterity but the opposite of it. Is there a word for that?

>>16638608
This is what is called a cope

>>16638617
This is what is called a cope for a cope

>>16638700
This is how you know it's a cope

>>16628938
Decline of the West obviously. And anyone trying to tell me video games are equal to Beethoven is brain dead and not worth talking too

>>16628938
You can only catch the spirit of an era only after it passes. Wait until it ends. In the meantime you can examine 20th century instead, which had a lot of geniuses of the other kind.
Did you notice that I said "the other kind"? Because I'm not sure if one era can be judged by the standards of another. It's neither better, nor worse, it's just so different.
And your OP picture comes here just handy. Premodern/tradition - judging present by the standards of the past.
Modern - judging past by the standards of the present.
Postmodern - just recognizing that historical eras are too different to be judged by the standards of any era.
Guess how I know that you were traditionalist with your statement.

>>16628938
Western art is dead and done. Only SCIENCE remains to be explored. Did you even read him?

>>16628938
Classic music is literally pop-music of the past.