Is the reason there are no great living writers under 50 years of age because no one knows where to go after...

I think is going to be a while until literature gets a pulse again. This is the times of movies and trap music, this will pass in the next 10 years, people will not able to handle this level of stimulation for so long.

Where to go?

Where to go after postmodernism.

Yeah, where to go after postmodernism? I want to know

UNPOPULAR FACT

LITERARY MOVEMENT TERMS ARE CREATED BY ACADEMIA, NOT WRITERS

NO ONE SETS OUT TO WRITE POSTMODERNISM OR MODERNISM OR ROMANTICISM ETC

THEY ARE INFLUENCED BY OTHER WRITERS AND BY THE TIME THEY LIVE IN

THEN CRITICS THROW THEIR WORKS UNDER TERMS

>muh postmodernism ended it all, it was so great there's no escape from it now! aww
kill yourselves

What does Veeky Forums think about this? prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/postmodernism-is-dead-va-exhibition-age-of-authenticism

Hegel.

That's the literal opposite of what I said.

Not bad, not bad at all.

Some don't reach 50

Not the person youre in dialogue with, but here's my piece anyway-- time (which is just as limited now as it has ever been) and both the number of options and therefore the level of the distractions that exist today make the type of literacy available to one even 25 years ago almost impossible to achieve today. Also technology, which helps so much, also tends to make the brain soft-- not too long ago one had to remember phone numbers, important birthdays, historical facts, etc., by oneself in order to possess them. Now, though far more convenient, this is no longer necessary. This is but a tiny example, but clear enough to show that the brain is no longer exercised the way it had to be formerly, today. Therefore, etc.

Knausgaard

>unironically thinking this
>being this retarded

>ultimately the only response youre capable of-- QED

I am the author of the century but you won't hear of me for a few years. I'm going to kill myself to generate interest in my (rather masterful) novella, and I'll live through eternity. Watch for the initials Q. H.

>QED
Avoid the terms you do not understand - exposes you for the fool that you are.

What's the novella about?

It's a (post) post-modern narrative concerning a pizza delivery boy, Quinton, and his obsession with denying meaning in the minute. It's a tale of the evils of extreme irony, apathy and insincerity, if you will.

>Is the reason there are no great living writers under 50 years of age because no one knows where to go after postmodernism?
no its because of fags like you waiting to be spoonfeed for your lack of talent.
same thing with music.
"how come music suck these days" as he himself can't even play some simple chords.

tl:dr everybody sucks ass including you

Yes, it's not like people kept paper phonebooks, calendars and encyclopedias. Memorization has nothing to do with fluid intelligence and analytical capability and those qualities are steadily improving in humans generation by generation - see Flynn effect. Your whole position is retarded teenage babble comprised of distorted views of the past and fundamental misunderstanding of intelligence and cognitive development. You should fuck off and kys yourself.

>implying ability to create art is necessary to assess others' art
>implying there has been any good music in the last 10 years

How do i gonna know that its a new movement if i havent even read aal the classics?????????

this tbqh

I don't really follow contemporary lit either but blaming education is retarded when due to technology you can access all the works you'll ever need to be a great writer. Writing lit was never a popular activity and as we all know time filters out the shit, I'm sure there are genius writers out there right now, we just don't know about them because of all the trash you are fed every day which marginalizes them.

There is a writer that is really great under 50....
Me.

>
>>implying ability to create art is necessary to assess others' art
>>implying there has been any good music in the last 10 years
I'm not that user but I would argue both of those points. If you don't understand how something works technically you can't assess it well. You can only say whether you like it or not. Being a musician doesn't make me enjoy more music or enjoy music more, but if (You) and I were listening to the same song we would experience it in different ways.

It's precisely the other way around. A trained musician would be able to appreciate the technical side of composition/reproduction, but the aesthetic experience itself would be the same.

all i know is you haven't created shit

Thanks for you valuable projection.

It's actually because nobody has anything to write about since their lives consist of little more than going from one institution to another.

post what you have made then

Flynn Effect, Cognitive Development.. what do these have at all to do with the subject of this thread? I understand your need to stick with the pop science bull shit youre familiar with, and the way you rattle on is mildly impressive, but it not only misses the point, but reads mine poorly. 'Memory' was submitted as an instance of mind, not as some general rule. The point is that the mind isn't worked day-in, day-out in a context involving the physical embodiments of other minds, i.e. actual living, breathing people. If you spend so much time with your face in a screen relative to spending it with other people youre going to be disadvantaged when it comes to writing about life, which ultimately concerns your reactions with other people; the more time you spend gaming, the less you spend reading, etc. Examples can be supplied at will. Now, if you can pull your head out of your ass long enough, perhaps you can respond within the context of the question asked. The reason ultimately as to why novels aren't written like they used to be is clearly a want of time. Your streamlined ideas of 'intelligence' have absolutely nothing to do with it.

Youre a funny little bitch-

>gets called out on his shit
>hurr durr pop science it's not what i meant at all despite it being crystal clear here's another weaksauce non-argument
Tech itself doesn't in any way hinder personal interaction. Extremes like obsession with social media, vidya escapism or autistic tendencies to argue with random people on the internet are actual extremes. Most people manage to keep it all in check and have completely normal social life IRL with plenty of experiences with actual living breathing people, just like our forefathers did. Your example is pointless - there's a great number of things one could be doing instead of reading and there's no basis to single out video games. Novels are indeed written like they used to be - this whole thread is just usual contrarian 'everything contemporary is shit' which is a song as old as time. There's gold out there - dig in and find it. Or just wait a decade or two for the inevitable sieve of time. In any case stop whining, faggot.

Wallace shoved the bar up his ass and hanged himself. Now everyone's confused.

All of you have the potential to be great writers :)

That's a cute polemic, I especially liked the bit about the all but exposed treasure, and IRL I actually agree with much of what's written there. But with the exception of your hyperbolic opinion of what (you) call 'the contrarian nature' of the topic, you really aren't able to address it..
But let's cut to the chase. Who's your great living novelist under the age of 50? All things being the same (but with mighty search engines at your disposal) this should be very easy for (you). It's what the thread asks of your position--

Postmodernism is the end, what comes "next" is taking the forgotten ideas from the past into a unified theory of everything. So if you want somewhere to start, Hegel.

But I thought pomo was supposed to be inclusion of everything if not ultimately the unification! Nonetheless I like the Hegel idea-- the Zusatze in the 3 Encyclopedia books are incredibly clear, insightful, and need to be mined.

Most middle-class people can't name 3 friends who aren't glued to their smartphones, let alone disconnected from social media. Technology has increased distractions and decreased concentration. The way private spaces on the Internet has replaced public spaces in social gatherings has opened avenues to controlled, stimulating information that actively shapes the way we think for the worse. The Internet isn't like it once was in 2000—it's more than just an accessible database, and its effects on our collective lifestyles can't be ignored. '