Middlebrows are cancer

>Virginia Woolf attacks middlebrows as petty purveyors of highbrow cultures for their own shallow benefit. Rather than selecting books for their intrinsic value, middlebrows select and read what they are told is best. Middlebrows are concerned with how what they do makes them appear, unlike highbrows, the avant-garde men and women who act according to their indelible commitment to beauty, value, art, form, and integrity. Woolf said, “We highbrows read what we like and do what we like and praise what we like”. Likewise, a lowbrow is devoted to a singular interest, a person “of thoroughbred vitality who rides his body in pursuit of a living at a gallop across life”; and, therefore, are equally worthy of reverence, as they, too, are living for what they intrinsically know as valuable.
>Middlebrows, instead, are “betwixt and between”, which Woolf classifies as “in pursuit of no single object, neither Art itself nor life itself, but both mixed indistinguishably, and rather nastily, with money, fame, power, or prestige”. Their value system rewards quick gains through literature already designated as ‘Classic’ and ‘Great’, never of their own choosing, because “to buy living art requires living taste”. The middlebrow are meretricious — which is much less demanding than authenticity.

Can we say that people that only listen to X widely respected artist or only watch Y widely acclaimed films for the sake of appearing better than others, to themselves and other people, are equivalent middlebrows readers?

Do you agree on start calling such people "middlebrows" here on Veeky Forums?

Every time I hear someone on Veeky Forums use the phrase "objectively shit taste" I want to punch a hole through my monitor.

>Do you agree on start calling such people "middlebrows" here on Veeky Forums?

I think it should be the wordfilter for "patrician."

>I think it should be the wordfilter for "patrician."
FUCKING LITERALLY THIS.

>I think it should be the wordfilter for "patrician."
Holy kek.

pretentious hipster bullshit desu

>Do you agree on start calling such people "middlebrows" here on Veeky Forums?
Why do you care so much what other people say about their own or about your taste? Why do you care what Virginia Woolf has to say on the matter? Why do you ascribe any meaning to something which in itself has no meaning at all? Why don't you just like what you like without taking anyone's shit for it and let other people like whatever they like without giving them shit?
>Every time I hear someone on Veeky Forums use the phrase "objectively shit taste" I want to punch a hole through my monitor.
But that's exactly what the person writing that wants you to do. You're a loser with low control over your emotions if that rustles your jimmies so bad.

>Why don't you just like what you like without taking anyone's shit for it and let other people like whatever they like without giving them shit?
they are the ones who do all the things mentioned by OP to look down to other people

>I think it should be the wordfilter for "patrician."

Brilliant.

>It's a silver spoons condemn people that actually need to work to survive for not being authentic enough episode

Fuck her and the entirety of pretentious victorian literature.

Eh, did you even read what she said about the lower class?

Not that user, but curious what was said?

It's in the fucking OP you middlebrow loser

“Hipster/middlebrow” is a term co-opted for use as a meaningless pejorative in order to vaguely call someone else’s authenticity into question and, by extension, claim authenticity for yourself.
It serves no conversational function and imparts no information, save for indicating the opinions and preferences of the speaker.
Meanwhile, a market myth has sprung up around the term, as well as a cultural bogeyman consisting of elusive white 20-somethings who wear certain clothes (but no one will agree on what), listen to certain music (no one can agree on this either), and act a certain way (you’ve probably sensed the pattern on your own).
You can’t define what “that kind of behavior or fashion or lifestyle” actually is, nor will you ever be able to. That’s because you don’t use “hipster” to describe an actual group of people, but to describe a fictional stereotype that is an outlet for literally anything that annoys you.
The twist, of course, is that if it weren’t for your own insecurities, nothing that a “hipster” could do or wear would ever affect you emotionally. But you are insecure about your own authenticity - “Do I wear what I wear because I want to? Do I listen to my music because I truly like it? I’m certainly not like those filthy hipsters!” - so you project those feelings.
Suffice it to say, no one self-identifies as a hipster; the term is always applied to an Other, to separate the authentic Us from the inauthentic, “ironic” Them.
tl;dr: if you believe hipsters exist, you are a plebeian.

She is right that art is ultimately instinctual (instincts of the well bred), closer to the "entertainment" definition than Kant's "disinterestedness" but that is no reason to discount critical authority (instincts of the great judges) and pander to contemporary "avant garde" (ironically, this is more aptly named middlebrow, being the rebellion against artistic form following the french revolution).

>Every time I listen to a joke I get irrationally mad

see Mistakes of the subhumans. They immediately interpret the idea of subjectivity as giving them free reign to support any viewpoint that they want, no matter how incoherent, ignorant and wretched. Sure, the ant too has its own perspective of things, and therefore its own subjective reality, but who gives a shit about the reality of an ant? The greater the man the greater — and hence the more objective — his perspective, and therefore the idea of subjectivity does not undermine the absolute rule of inequality in the universe but is precisely the mechanism by which it comes about.

>The lower classes are only allowed to die in the factories and fields and live without education and experience life purely based on their romanticized instincts
I bet she would hate public libraries too

>Hurr

Low-brow =/= lower-class.

Lowbrow essentially describes someone who's too busy enjoying their life to care about "the finer things" but - unlike middlebrows - doesn't make pretenses that they do. A middlebrow could be a steel worker who's insecure about the fact that he can barely read or it can be a millionaire playboy who really just wants to spend all of his time fucking women, sailing and driving sports cars but who pretends to care about art/music/etc. because his peers will mock him if he doesn't.

It's about conformity, not class.

>"avant garde" (ironically, this is more aptly named middlebrow, being the rebellion against artistic form following the french revolution).

............................................

You do know that high brow european aristocrats of the 50s-70s were the ones funding and providing patronage to the avant-garde, right?

You're a fool.

I think nowadays the way to appear sophisticated is to reject everything that's widely considered great and latch onto the most weird and obscure things you can find. Which I honestly think, if we have to have pretentious people, is the better kind to have since it at least encourages people to find things that are genuinely underappreciated.

I'm torn here. I agree, but I also think Woolf was cunt.

>Virginia Woolf attacks middlebrows
Now that is rich

Veeky Forums is the middlebrow board, full of the most shallow of discussion from memers and pseuds. Tripping on Veeky Forums is crowning yourself a prince of fools.