ITT: things pseudo-patricians (plebs) say

>I read for the prose

I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle.

> If you haven't read [x book] you aren't a [philosopher/historian/whatever]
> [x] is the dominant academic opinion so it's right by definition and I don't have to justify myself or argue
> Sartre is bad (but Heidegger is good)
> Wittgenstein is the end of philosophy

I'm OP.

>pseudo-patricians

The plot is the most fundamental part of a story. Not to say that the quality of prose is unimportant, but its value in a story is dependant on its relationship with the plot. Your appreciation of prose is incomplete without proper consideration of context.

>How come black people only write about being black?

That's also all they talk and think about as well.

>I'm OP.

>>ITT: things pseudo-patricians (plebs) say
>Plot is unimportant.

>> Good prose is realistic, not stilted

>>entry-level

>It's not unimportant but it's not that important. Plebs look for plot in everything, so they like Charles Dickens and JK Rowling (even though even their plots are more or less shit; with Dickens I make an exception of Pickwick Papers, but it's the least plot-driven thing he wrote). It's all they can see. A patrician can enjoy something with no real plot at all.

> True they don't say it's unimportant because it's very useful for hacks.

>Either you're retarded or you need to read the thread again.

> >I read for the prose

>I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle.

>> If you haven't read [x book] you aren't a [philosopher/historian/whatever]
> > [x] is the dominant academic opinion so it's right by definition and I don't have to justify myself or argue
> > Sartre is bad (but Heidegger is good)
> > Wittgenstein is the end of philosophy

>The plot is the most fundamental part of a story. Not to say that the quality of prose is unimportant, but its value in a story is dependant on its relationship with the plot. Your appreciation of prose is incomplete without proper consideration of context.

> >How come black people only write about being black?

>That's also all they talk and think about as well.

you forgot

>>I'm OP.
>
>>>ITT: things pseudo-patricians (plebs) say
>>Plot is unimportant.
>
>
>>> Good prose is realistic, not stilted
>
>>>entry-level
>
>>It's not unimportant but it's not that important. Plebs look for plot in everything, so they like Charles Dickens and JK Rowling (even though even their plots are more or less shit; with Dickens I make an exception of Pickwick Papers, but it's the least plot-driven thing he wrote). It's all they can see. A patrician can enjoy something with no real plot at all.
>
>> True they don't say it's unimportant because it's very useful for hacks.
>
>>Either you're retarded or you need to read the thread again.
>
>> >I read for the prose
>
>>I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle.
>
>
>>> If you haven't read [x book] you aren't a [philosopher/historian/whatever]
>> > [x] is the dominant academic opinion so it's right by definition and I don't have to justify myself or argue
>> > Sartre is bad (but Heidegger is good)
>> > Wittgenstein is the end of philosophy
>
>>The plot is the most fundamental part of a story. Not to say that the quality of prose is unimportant, but its value in a story is dependant on its relationship with the plot. Your appreciation of prose is incomplete without proper consideration of context.
>
>> >How come black people only write about being black?
>
>>That's also all they talk and think about as well.

not to mention
>you forgot
>>>I'm OP.
>>
>>>>ITT: things pseudo-patricians (plebs) say
>>>Plot is unimportant.
>>
>>
>>>> Good prose is realistic, not stilted
>>
>>>>entry-level
>>
>>>It's not unimportant but it's not that important. Plebs look for plot in everything, so they like Charles Dickens and JK Rowling (even though even their plots are more or less shit; with Dickens I make an exception of Pickwick Papers, but it's the least plot-driven thing he wrote). It's all they can see. A patrician can enjoy something with no real plot at all.
>>
>>> True they don't say it's unimportant because it's very useful for hacks.
>>
>>>Either you're retarded or you need to read the thread again.
>>
>>> >I read for the prose
>>
>>>I guess the truth is somewhere in the middle.
>>
>>
>>>> If you haven't read [x book] you aren't a [philosopher/historian/whatever]
>>> > [x] is the dominant academic opinion so it's right by definition and I don't have to justify myself or argue
>>> > Sartre is bad (but Heidegger is good)
>>> > Wittgenstein is the end of philosophy
>>
>>>The plot is the most fundamental part of a story. Not to say that the quality of prose is unimportant, but its value in a story is dependant on its relationship with the plot. Your appreciation of prose is incomplete without proper consideration of context.
>>
>>> >How come black people only write about being black?
>>
>>>That's also all they talk and think about as well.

I had an English professor who would routinely say Wittgenstein was the end of philosophy.

When pressed to explain what the fuck that even meant, he would just laugh for several moments and then take another question.

>I post on Veeky Forums

>he doesn't like discussing what he reads

Pleb detected.

Blacks are constantly reminded that they are black and their place in the western world is revolved around their blackness.

A story about a family living in segregation area would have been just called a story if it were Irish, even if the author made a shitload of references to his being Irish throughout the book.

I hate this meme pleb.
Please read a book.

I think aym rand was dumdum, but I loved her adhd amphetamine riddled mind and would want to fuck and marry her

I honestly hate the black persecution complex meme, but I mist confess there are some good stories from it. In particular, that one where a black guy is a schoolteacher in some southern shithole. He hates his life and so do all his black friends. He physically beats his students to push them, and eventually kills another black man in a bar because he hates how he is satiated with brick laying (even though he isnt)

Clearly he believes language cannot accurately convey philosophical meaning.

He answered your question and you didn't even understand it.

This actually sounds like a very intelligent book. Remember the name?

>In my opinion, the worldbuilding makes up for the poor story.

>[x] is the dominant academic opinion so it's right by definition and I don't have to justify myself or argue
In my experience the only time people on this board talk about a dominant academic position is in response to edgy 17 year old deterministic moral nihilists who just assume they have the default position and that anyone who disagrees is stupid.

So I take it you didn't really like the world of literature over the last century then?

what a pretentious cunt

>it's subjective

Emphasis on cunt.

Emphasis on emphasis.

I mean, you gotta understand that he majored in english, he can't be that inteligent to explain all of the ramblings he heard from the other teachers

>I'm invested in US politics but not in political theory

>I'm invested in political theory but not in any politics

Emphasis

>Plot is important

found the pleb

I hate her but I hate collectivists even more and she triggers them so I give her a pass.

Emphasis on dubs

I didn't ask any question, though.

This is correct.
Although that is true, I don't think that that was what the user was trying to convey.

>I understand what I read

>political theory
Ayy lmao

>Jared Diamond is great