Duuude A Song of Ice and Fire is so fucking deep man, it's probably the best book series of our generation

>blah blah blah look at what some normies said, how do I show 'em lit?

> Shut the fuck up user
This, no one cares about your whiney lit-validated opinion

here's your (you). Great contribution lad.

He's right.

At the end of the day, you can't force uncultured people to be cultured. Just like what you like, and allow degenerate plebs to like what they like.

You should also hang around different people. I have pretty pleb friends that don't read classics at all, but they still show appreciation for them, and realize that the things they like aren't really the best.

>here's your (you). Great contribution lad.

Instead of saying no, why don't you ask him to elaborate on his claim. How many books of this generation has he read? What makes this one so great?

I'm still not sure why Veeky Forums denizens sit around imagining these scenarios and pretending they happened. Are they just so lonely that they try to figure out what it would be like to talk to normal people about books? Nobody gives a shit what you're reading out there.

>> Shut the fuck up user, why do you have to be so pretentious all the time and why do you think your opinion matters? There's no objective metric for books or any other form of entertainment, it's all subjective.

you should of been like
>if you dont want to hear someone elses opinion why state your own opinion on books you fucking idiot

or this

The answer to your question is you don't know how to argue. Simple as that

This user got it

You need the person to make positive claims and then argue that those claims are not true. You can't prove a negative in a vacuum. It is the same with you can't prove that I am actually a magical little girl typing to you right now.

Ask me for proof of the claim, then break down the proof. For art, ask for good reasons to support the claim, then show why these are not good reasons to support the claim.

The show is so popular that people do discuss the books openly. Ordinarily you're right, but this is a unique case.

Mentioning DeLillo and McCarthy as the best contemporary writers is laughable son.

resort to intersubjectivity
the people who care about and study literature agree with you and disagree with them
there's no objectivity to taste but your group is more literate and literary

appeal to authority. im sure you know some established figure they respect. make up a reason why you dont like the book and attribute said quote to the person.

cheap but youll win the day

Reminder that there is not and can not be any objective value in art and everyone's tastes are just as valid as yours

validity becomes a moot point then, it's like you're trying to make a normative decree from a position you've just denied the existence of

>there's no objective metric

Said no good connoisseur ever. You want skilled, insightful, visionary work by people who have put in the hours and blessed by the muses. Good art follows a standard of excellence. There is no denying this, despite what these flaccid mental invalids think.

If there are no valid standards other than individual taste then their statement that it's 'the best' is meaningless- it just means it's their favourite.

Also and

I didn't say that value doesn't exist or that we can't use useful objective parameters.

I meant that there are no usable objective parameters for determining the value of art, leaving subjective "enjoyment" as the only determinant of value.

sorry I was attacking the intelligibility of the "just as valid as yours" point in conjunction with the denial of objectivity, not attacking the denial of objectivity

>just mention that the series is genre fiction and not literature
Why would you want people to think you're a pseud, user?

Also OP is an autist and a fag.

Well first of all they claimed it was "deep" and there are objective measures of that. Secondly, there are objective measures of what *theoretically ought* be interesting. So certain technical skills like stream of consciousness.

Subjectivists literally need to kill themselves.

The meaning lied in his reverence for the icefire book not its literary merit. You misunderstood the language game of your interlocutor.

>What's your answer to it?
Laugh up half a lung onto their face and then never speak to them again after slowly cackling away into the distance.

Oh really? I would love to hear what those 'objective' measures look like.

How would it be any different just because you take it to a lower level and analyze individual claims? What exactly can you say other than statements like: "This book used this many words." or "This book had a higher variation in words". It's meaning less any says nothing about the overall quality of the book.

I guess there are literary metrics you could apply but how are they just not a bunch of arbitrary rules agreed by an arbitrary set of people. I might aswell come up with my own rule of metric called Plebian analysis that judge each work on how cliff hangers each chapter has. The only difference would be that there are a bunch of self proclaimed experts that would not take it seriously, but who cares? Desu.

Basically. Some things are so preposterous they don't even merit a refutation other than scorn and ridicule.

>there's no objectivity to taste but your group is more literate and literary
You realize that this is a hidden tautology, right? It bears mentioning that these are also the people who define "literary", so of course they will be more literary. Note that this also doesn't mean that they're more correct in their views.

How do I bcm smrt like u