Why was sub-saharan Africa incapable of creating any literature or poetry of great value?

Why was sub-saharan Africa incapable of creating any literature or poetry of great value?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anansi
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The environment was too easy to live in, they didn't have to invest in living in communities and higher degree of agriculture. The people never adapted out of animal state.

The IQ thing, blacks at least had a literary revolution in Harlem pre Jew america. Have yet to read that era but Douglas wrote well, he wasn't incisive but he wasn't boring

whitey burned it all

Maybe it was easy to live for a hunters-gatherers in Europe and Mesopotamia mane, communities just had to stay small and autonomous. Maybe they just had the seeds and the floor while Africans didn't. European population raised during the neolithic era, but I don't think we can bu sure about individual wealth or life quality doing the same. Agriculture doesn't take much less work than hunt and gathering.
Regarding to the question about literature tho, that's essentially the cause. African communities have myths and shit, but they remain in a primitive state, never going beyond that. Keep in mind Gilgamesh: it was first composed by summerians, but, as far as we know, it was akkadians who first transcribed it like 1000 years later regarding to its conservation.
Gilgamesh may have been a myth at the beginning, but it turned into literature when there was a culture developed enough to valorate some texts as literary and fictional. Gilgamesh was foreign and old enough for that, even if akkadians still knew it.

Another stormfag (((race realism))) thread, I see.

bump

Prove him wrong.

this question is racist

Please stop trying to (((redpill))) Veeky Forums and return to stormfront.

So you can't

>((( ))))
>go back to stormfront
kek, ur like a little baby

If all your thoughts on macro cultural differences came from guns germs and steel, you might not have enough information to comment. I'll rephrase that, you don't have enough information

They had a strong oral tradition,needing no paper but the community mind to hold their lore.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anansi

What makes it strong? The monopoly of it? They weren't reciting the Iliad and Odyssey

How can a question be racist

For the same reason rocks haven'd created literature or poetry.

If you just want to call black people stupid and worthless just say it OP, don't pretend you care about literature.

Just curious, but does Will Durant talk about Sub Saharan Africa in his work on Civilization?

1. they did
2. but there were, historically, not many people in Africa so not as much was made
3. also it was mostly oral so only niche humanities fags know about it

The quantity and diversity of stories.

Of course they didn't recite the Iliad or the Odyssey, they were not Greek. They had other stories. Why would you even mention that?

Black people are stupid and ignorant... The question still remains

Did they recite something of that magnitude (the obvious implication)??