ITT: Authors that Canon Slaves Love

James Joyce: his 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: his 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: Underworld is a piece of shit, his early books are far better.

Lord Byron: 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

god I wish bloom made a thread/s here

t. school of resentment

Do you write?

it's so much easier to shit on someone than say something good about them. David Foster Wallace is the only good writer in history.

Ask yourself who you are OP, will you have an answer? Can you truly admit to yourself that you have no resemblance of happines or sincerity in your coal heart?

9/10 should have done something more original for Woolf

I dont think its possible to have literarary talent/skill and hold the opinions stated in the Op. it may be that their only skill and talent is making contrarian bait for (yous), however, antiironically proving OP correct, that he embodies a greater amount of tragedy, and drama, and therefore all in all comedy then all the greats, to which we then must thank, for being a glaring base by which all good can be contrasted against

t. canon slaves

dude, bro, this op is soo fucking funny, im gonna use this some time in a few weeks, I cant imagine the butthurt yous I might get sage

this is pasta

What about T. S. Eliot? You probably haven't even read him.

dickinson, whitman, melville and tennyson are the only authors i like out of those.

>tl;dr anglos are shit
yeah, and?

is this your attempt at nabokovian criticism?

2/10

>Virgina Woolf's proxies (Atwood)

I was with you until Pound, op. I mean, what is even wrong with "dilettantism" (nice coinage :DDDD)

>Using the word "bourgeoisie" unironically

Samuel Beckett was a far better novelist than Joyce. I strongly recommend More Pricks Than Kicks.

hey nobody's perfect

That's funny

Wrong about Woolf, Dickinson & Melville, apart form that your hamfisted iconoclasm is most welcome.

Recommendme some C20th lit old cove

do you actually like anything? Who is your favourite author?

He won't tell us cuz he's just here for le ebic troll

OP, we're gonna need your opinion on:

>Homer
>Plato
>Aristotle
>Virgil
>Ovid
>Augustine
>Dante
>Cervantes
>Chaucer
>Marlowe
>W I L L I A M fucking S H A K E S P E A R E
>Milton
>Voltaire
>Goethe
>Flaubert
>Rimbaud
>Blake
>Nietzsche
>Dostoevsky
>Tolstoy
>Chekhov
>Hawthorne
>Proust
>Yeats
and why not, (((Kafka)))

before we can decide if you are a pleb or a patrician

the best part about Veeky Forums threads are the following:

neurotic high iq sociopaths whose personality disorders are so strong they can’t stop affecting superiority and thus can never engage with their peers; brainlets who haven’t the capacity for critique and will egg on the neurotic sociopaths; troll nihilists whose only purpose is to shit into other people’s mouths; p-zombie redditors and meme faggots from the /pol/ flood who don’t have cognition or any linguistic intelligence to speak of; earnest midwits who are too slow footed to dance with the neurotic sociopaths and too kindly, even keeled to smash the insipid brainlet hordes who ruin threads by getting caught in schoolyard argumentation loops; women who announce they have a vagina and are sure you’re angry you can’t have it; homosexuals who are schizophrenic and can’t make the most cursory of efforts to deal with a topic not centered around social signaling and sex; drug addicts and NEETs who aren’t sure what we’re talking about or what board this is

>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).

Shit, is this the interpretation college english professors are pushing these days? I didn't even know they would still teach a book written by a white male, I guess they'll allow it if they can find a way to conceive of him as self-loathing.

Neat bait thread, kid. I'm going to send a link to my good friend Tommy and have him check it out.

Naw, saying that the White Whale represents the White Male is probably the dumbest thing I've read on Veeky Forums desu. AHAB is the White Male archetype.

DH Lawrence thought the same though

He's a fucking hack who wrote shitty characters
>m-muh oedipus complex
doesn't exist

Ahab represents the white male and Moby Dick represents toxic masculinity amirite guyz? hurhurhur

You’re both retarded

Woolf, Dickinson, Whitman, DeLillo, Percy Shelly, Plath, Faulkner, Tennyson, Pound, Stevens are not canon. People try to force them on us. But they'll never be in the canon. Only brainlets like them. The exception might be Pound, who I don't think anyone is equipped to understand.

>Woolf, Dickinson, Whitman
>not canon

and me m8. been a while, but i'm back now. things gonna look up in here.

Good work but you totally dropped the ball in failing to denounce the worst poet of all: T. S. Eliot.

Also, Byron wrote some pretty decent poetry.

Pound was a great reader and critic of poetry, but post one poem of his that shows great inspiration and not just shrewd experimentation with form.

I fart a poop

They suck. Only faggots think they belong on the canon.

t. literal motherfucker

Pound's "poetry" were actually imitations and translations of little known poets, usually uncredited. Not only was he a poser, he was a plagiarist. We don't know Pound the poet but by his poetic masks, but then again we don't want to. Pound didn't know shit, he pretends erudition to trap the unwary. His "grasp" of other languages was often intensely feigned and extremely showy, he literally knew almost no Chinese. He "translated" the sea-farer but did not have the skills necessary to read the original. Given, Eliot and other moderns have a similar tendency. Eliot wasn't a Sanskrit scholar, but Shanteh shanteh shanteh.

Eliot's entire corpus is one, long, sustained whine at the decrepitude of modernity with a kind of nostalgia for the good old days. The Waste Land is also a literary pastiche. Bourgeois to the nth degree, poetry for cuckold academics who get an erection for obscure words. It's poetry for cuckolds. It's a kind of weak, lukewarm despair that runs throughout all his poetry. His entire poetry is a testament to the "decay of western culture", yet there is nothing that stinks more of decay than his poetry. There's a distinctly modern form of writing that is exemplified in Eliot, I call it "phrase fetishism", it's a fetish for slick phrases. In Eliot you have things like, "Do I dare, disturb the universe?", "I will show your fear in a handful of dust", "shantih shantih shantih", "O O O that Shakespearen rag", "this is the way the world ends, not with a bang but with a whimper", and so on. The key to this is not that the phrases themselves are somehow illegitimate, it's the way they are shoved in without any introduction or resolution. They are shoved in like a random dissonant phrase in a modern music composition, or like a jazz improvisation. Theses phrases come across to the easily-impressed as "profound", but they are a hoax. Eliot's phrase, "a heap of broken images", describes his own poetry best. It's an artificial profundity created by mysterious, quasi-metaphysical phrases. It's something to do with the choice of diction, but also the sound and rhythm. The obsession with "literature", with allusions to "literature", with "literary" phrases. It's incestual.

>"Do I dare, disturb the universe?"
>The key to this is not that the phrases themselves are somehow illegitimate, it's the way they are shoved in without any introduction or resolution.
you are pulling this out of your ass and its full of shit. Post the context lines surrounding it to see your claim is unfounded and empty, meaningless, nonsensical, nothingness, are your gripes.

If you can't appreciate phrases in themselves then you have no business reading poetry

10/10 this post is really netting them

you take that back about female Shakespeare

>Emily Dickinson: muh vagina
Stopped reading here.
What a dumb piece of shit.

...

Wrong
Wrong

And those who purport to know them all

X person: dumb contrarian simplistic opinion

well done

John Milton for his disgusting Epic "poem," which has no decent poetic qualities whatsoever. Completely ugly verse from the first line to the last.

I would read a book that was just Bloom panning authors and their works.

>tfw you ask someone on Veeky Forums to denounce T. S. Eliot
>tfw he copypastas your own shit from ages ago

>has never read a womyn book ever

>kill whitey(the White Whale)
hahahahhaha epic shitpost user

You have a bad sense for literature.

>ABLOO BLOO BLOO NIGGERS!! WAAHHH LIBURALZZ

Opinion discarded.

He didn't coin it, retard.

>Pound didn't know shit, he pretends erudition to trap the unwary. His "grasp" of other languages was often intensely feigned and extremely showy, he literally knew almost no Chinese.

Preach!