Daily reminder that if you read The New Yorker, you are a sood

Daily reminder that if you read The New Yorker, you are a sood.

Other urls found in this thread:

newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/knausgaard-or-ferrante
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Was that really published? Absolutely disgusting.

newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/knausgaard-or-ferrante

Americans will always be deeply, fundamentally STUPID when it comes to literature and the humanities in general, and nothing will EVER change that.

If not them, then who are the titanic figures of the current literary moment? Also are the Neapolitan novels any good?

There aren't any and there is no "movement", unless you consider narcissism a movement.

Only Ferrante I've read is The Lost Daughter so I can't say. Lost Daughter was pretty good though, nothing extraordinary.

Also it's wrong to say that Author X is just like Author Y because they are both good and famous. Hemingway and Faulkner were both great but their prose was wildly different. That's where this writer is fucking up. She's saying that Ferrante and Knausgaard are the same as Dusty and Tolstoy because they're famous and presumably good. That's it. The next part could be part of a Buzzfeed quiz, "Are you Knausgaard or Ferrante?" and the first questions are where do you live and who do you hang out with?
I'm not saying either of these authors are bad but the comparison is just misplaced and insulting to everyone involved, including the reader.

This kind of thing comes about because article-writers like this feel the need to 'balance' any discussion about a white male - i.e. they need to talk up someone who isn't a white male to expiate their shame at being seen to praise one of those that identity-politicians despise.

Cut it out with the reactionary shit. Ferrante is a good writer and worth discussing. I haven't read any Karl but it seems the general sentiment holds Ferrante as the better writer.

They aren't titanic, i don't care if someones the best of a generation, there's a reason golden, silver, bronze ages exist for civilizations, sometimes stuff is just a LOW quality all around.

It is genuinely possible for this to happen.

Their poetry selections are so poor. I have some especially terrible ones that i rip out from the NYers in the various waiting rooms I inhabit. Others I write little explanations next to them explaining why they are so crummy so the next reader will know what the score is.

I also recaption their terrible cartoons with very bitter, very bland 'existential' truths.

Their cartoons are cute.

Rejected, detected.

>movement

Where are you getting 'movement' from? The clipping says moment.

Improve your reading comprehension.

It's what Trump's calling his campaign and followers.

We have a /pol/ infestation.

I subscribed to the New Yorker when they had one of those deals that was like 12 months for $20 or something like that but after a while the very thinly-veiled blind liberalism kind of got to me and I decided not to renewed. Is anyone subscribed to the TLS? I've been considering it.

renew it*

>very thinly-veiled blind liberalism

More like bright flashing neon.

Never would've guessed.

the article OP posted has literally nothing to do with Trump you utter spastic

Are there any literary journals that are just 90% essays on literature and short stories/poems by authors? I want to get a nice journal but the New Yorker seems to have too much politics for my taste.

Eh I mean liberalism and conservatism aren't necessarily bad things to be expressed, but my inclusion of the adjective "blind" was an attempt to make it clear that the New Yorker, much like NPR and other formerly liberal forms of media, care much more now about being deemed progressive than they do about having logical viewpoints.

>force fields

>please tell me what to read

Pathetic. It would take 5 minutes looking at each website to figure it out yourself.

Don't be retarded.

Nobody confuses the New Yorker with being a Conservative rag.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that anything published from a progressive or conservative viewpoint isn't necessarily bad until they care more about being associated with that viewpoint than they do about being "intelligent".

It's not a conspiracy.

I get it through my school, I'll probably subscribe again when I graduate. It's probably the best discussion of literature going on outside of journals for now.

Go back to /pol/ please.

Go back to infowars and your comfy 'logic.'

Can we not turn this into a ">go back to /pol/" ">fuckin libruls" thread please

I don't think you understand what's going on here.

Your linear logic is too simplistic for anyone to really care about.

Where do you think you are?

I kind of want to discuss what I just read online about white, male, heterosexual, middle class mass shooters. There was an explanation given that they were the most likely because they were the most likely to overreact to small setbacks because of their "extreme privilege" which doesn't make any logical sense. If someone is experiencing the utmost available privilege, wouldn't they be hyper-cognizant of any setback because they are in a position where they are likely to face setbacks and also have those setbacks be most detrimental? Idk the study was written by a white male so I might as well disregard it, right?

I use Exponential Logic(TM)

Feel free to make your own thread, then.

Are you autistic? Asking for recommendations doesn't mean you want to be told what to read.

As cute as this is, the problem's a bit more complicated.

Obviously; I'm just saying that being "privileged" doesn't amount to facing less setbacks.

Starting your response with a stale meme--not a good idea.

So logic. Wow.

>Are there any literary journals that are just 90% essays on literature and short stories/poems by authors?
This is not a meme you utter troglodyte.

Just different ones.

*pats your head, gently*

Another thread with potential, successfully destroyed by /pol/ butthurt! Way to go, chief. You know there's a level of discussion about literature above race and gender, right? You're no better than the SJWs.

>muh centrism

Excuse me for wanting to have a discussion without some idiot blathering on about things we're all already familiar with and for the most part agree with.

> mein kampf 2.0
based new yorker

I forgive you but don't do it again.

forgiveness begets repetition

That other guy wasn't me. I read it as movement because declaring "titanic" figures for a given moment would be even more asinine. I guess it was shittier than I thought.

What potential? The New Yorker has been shit for over half a century.

I'm pretty sure at this point the only people who read The New Yorker are people who want to look high brow.

Same goes for the writers. It's got nothing other than an overblown reputation going for it.

i never fucking heard of the norwegian until he exploded everywhere a few months ago. is the literary world really so starved?

Thanks for admitting you're not part of the literary world.

Now get out.

Your mediocrity is showing.

Honey, you're not having conversations. You're sharing ideas.

No one gives a shit which posts are yours.

He's a literal meme and that's exactly what he was going for.

Eat a dick, babe.

You stopped sharing ideas.

I like the New Yorker for talk of the town ... Poetry, fiction and reviews not so much

Fuck off, moderate