What are some examples of midwit/middle-brow lit and philosophy?

"i'm familiar with it"
so you haven't read it

Nah, seen its adaption which given its positively Victorian structure is just the same

trust me the adaptation, while fine as far as book adaptations go, completely miss the point of the novel. The book is way too internalized to be good for a screen adaptation, unlike NLMG.

Almost everything France has ever produced, in literature, philosophy and also music desu.

Big if true

Turn up the Erik Satie!

Peterson.

DFW
Franzen

Go to any used book sale and look at the contemporary fiction section. You'll see what I'm talking about
The art of racing in the rain, the bridges of madison county, the curious incident of the dog in the night time, and so on

>Canadian academic
I hope this is bait

The "existentialists". Buncha fuckin psueds

I read half of Buried giant before giving up.

Intellectualism is middle-brow, yes.

>midwit philosophy
Empiricism, 90% of Neoplatonism, Fichte, Young Hegelians other than Marx, early Husserl, most Marxists, Jung, Jacobi, Neokantians, Russell, Utilitarians.
>literature
Pic related.

These

>that comment
>that pic
brainlet post of the year

>pic related
Le prose and style are more important than substance may may.

brainlet

>he genuinely believes there aren't conditions of experience
>he genuinely believes most neoplatonists other than Plotinus had the slightest idea what the fuck they were doing
>he likes Fichte
>muh humanity
>muh religion
>muh ego
>he lkes Psychologism
>he doesn't understand the scope of most marxists I'm using and his brain translates my text to 'most marxist philosophers' because he can't fucking read
>he likes Jung's comically complex theory of conditions of experience
>he doesn't understand the problem with Jacobi's criticism of Kant
>he doesn't get Hegel
>he a cuck
>he a bigger cuck

pretty sure middlebrow is just another Veeky Forums buzzword that hold no meaning outside of "i don't like it and want to be a smug prick."

>muh substance and moral truths
This line of thinking is why the academia is in its current state.

>it's an inaccessibility=substance episode

>college professors and literary critics don't know about James Joyce

how fucking retarded would you have to be

You're a very depressing man.

No it was actually invented by Virginia "I'm better than you" Woolf to insult plebs

>He hasn't read Dickens
>He doesn't know what Pynchon thinks of him
>Doesn't know what Bloom thinks of him

stop, plebs

Wtf I am two persons at once now

so i was right then.

Wtf me too.

Still pisses me off that Meg never got to o

Lol, it's the complete opposite. Academia is the way it is because moral relativists like you took over.

>>he genuinely believes there aren't conditions of experience
Wait no one can be THIS much of a pseud this has to be a mista-
>>he doesn't get Hegel
Oh no never mind, you are just a useless pseud. NEXT!

>William Gaddis
>Flann O'Brien
>roughly the same level
Really? I found O'Brien to be one of the most immediately funny authors of all time, right up there with Milne's "Winnie-the-Pooh" and Italo Calvino (or Chaucer and Aristophanes). Gaddis, on the other hand, is dense with historical allusions and flatout references. Both are good, but I thought O'Brien was very accessible.

Not that they don't know about but that they don't truly KNOW his work.

Kierkegaard, Kant, any Marxist who is not Marx, Stirner, all analytical philosophy, Lacan, Derrida, McLuhan, Nabokov, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Goethe, Locke, Rousseau, Shakespeare, all of the Romans except Virgil and Ovid, Dante (should be considered master of pleb with Shakespeare), Beckett, Camus, Sartre, Hemingway, Faulkner, almost all English writers and philosophers, Evola, Guenon, Augustine, Aquinas (any christfag), Aristotle, Euclid, all of the German racialist writers from Lanz to Rosenberg, that Weninger nerd, Marinetti the futurist homo, Mishima, all Japanese authors, all female authors without a single exception in human history, any writer who was a bad poet, Borges, Stoics, Epicureans, Aristophanes, Sophocles (infinitely worse than Aeschylus), Marlowe, Baidou, Stein, Roth, the whole of the Beats, Emerson and Whitman, Thoreau, Miller, Mailer, Eliot, Wyndham Lewis, Jung, Spinoza, Parmenides, all non-Mahayana or Theravada buddhism, Esoteric Hitlerists, all WN lit like Siege, Turner Diaries and The Foundation, any books or philosophers that show timidity of spirit and an unwillingness to encounter the world and Self
women aren’t human they don’t get to coin words, whoever the first male was that interpreted her barking is the one who coined it
this is incredible shadow boxing

>ho is not Marx, Stirner, all analytical philosophy, Lacan, Derrida, McLuhan, Nabokov, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Goethe, Locke, Rousseau, Shakespeare, all of the Romans except Virgil and Ovid, Dante (should be considered master of pleb with Shakespeare), Beckett, Camus, Sartre, Hemingway, Faulkner, almost all English writers and philosophers, Evola, Guenon, Augustine, Aquinas (any christfag), Aristotle, Euclid, all of the German racialist writers from Lanz to Rosenberg, that Weninger nerd, Marinetti the futurist homo, Mishima, all Japanese authors, all female authors without a single exception in human history, any writer who was a bad poet, Borges, Stoics, Epicureans, Aristophanes, Sophocles (infinitely worse than Aeschylus), Marlowe, Baidou, Stein, Roth, the whole of the Beats, Emerson and Whitman, Thoreau, Miller, Mailer, Eliot, Wyndham Lewis, Jung, Spinoza, Parmenides, all non-Mahayana or Theravada buddhism, Esoteric Hitlerists, all WN lit like Siege, Turner Diaries and The Foundation, any books or philosophers that show timidity of spirit and an unwillingness to encounter the world and Self
How do you reconcile this ludicrous opinion with the fact you're some fat loser on the internet with no achievements comparable to any of these people?

>He hasn't read Dickens

EVERYONE has read Dickens

Superp bait m'lord! Bit too much effort though.

>but X & Y think highly of Z!
wow, you sure showed us

ayy le fonni mayme

lol at you
all serious opinions especially women and shakespeare

I don’t believe you

This pic is terible because it mixes style and substance. Joyce is a great stylist but rather shallow. He should be nowhere near the bottom.

my diary desu

>midwit/middle-brow philosophy?
all of it

...

Sam Harris

The more you grow, the more you realize American Poetry is the peak of the brows.

Malcolm Gladwell

To be fair with Joyce the style is the substance

>muh psy ants
>substance

>other than Marx
wew

>t.

et the pancake cot

This thread is the embodiment of D E G E N E R A C Y.

Even the OP picture succeeds in describing the mood of this thread.

“Hi, what do you dick wavers think is shit so we can feel like we’re of superior intellect.”

Then it’s >insert Veeky Forums author because kek and super edge.

Hurr durr learn to appreciate art for what it’s worth get your inferiority complex out of Veeky Forums, back to >>/b/

David Sedaris

t. brainlet

Someone's a little salty tonight

U mad

Wrong brainlet. MUH LITERATURE SHOULD SERVE A MORAL PURPOSE fags like you who don't have the faintest idea of what aesthetic appreciation is are the currently dominating strain of critics.
Dumbfaggot.

Joyce