ITT: Share your most contrarian literary opinions

this just seems like you read fiction so you can gain something productive out of it as opposed to just enjoying it

So basing my entire worldview and thought from ages 0-11 is larping? you seriously can't imagine someone stop believing in something? I'll bet my left nut I'm still more knowledgeable on the bible and catholicism after all this time because I understood it for what it is and still love it and the history around it. Believing in it is hilarious, shitposting while offering no counter argument is even funnier

nothing in this comment in implied in his post user, you just sound salty

I have a third of this board filtered at any one time.

But some miraculous and incredible events are historically documented. It merely requires a will not to dismiss them out of hand.

I don't dismisse them, I find there is no reason to believe in them. And having that mindset for literally anything else would not work in a civilisation

>And having that mindset for literally anything else would not work in a civilisation

I don't understand this sentence.

understanding history isn't just reading what some guy said 2000 years ago and believing that, the documentation is only one aspect of painting a true picture

Yes, it's pathetic, butthurt Christfag time. Favorite part of the day. Carry on...

having the mindset of 'you shouldn't dismiss something in which you cannot prove correct' only works for religion in a civilisation. Humans need context and any piece of evidence(it can be faulty) to perform every task of a civilized human. Even instinctual acts fall under this. I can't prove it wrong because it's a matter of faith but I find no reason to believe in it, let alone one out of the thousands throughout history

Yeah, but that's not relevant to my original point, which is that certain religious events throughout history do have evidence. We have some pieces of them to this day.

Being brought up in a heavily religious setting doesn't mean that you are spiritual at all. You may have heavily studied the bible, but I'd be willing to bet that you still don't understand many of the true messages in the text. Religious larpers are the worst. Don't look down on people who follow religion just because you failed to find God. I hope that one day you open up the bible again, with sincerity this time.

In keeping with the religious theme on-going in the thread: Buddhist texts are completely devoid of literary value, they contain some of the worst purple prose I've ever seen and contain stupidly long lists of names that would make the bible blush.

see

Kafka is fucking terrible

So it's ONLY the "true picture" if it happens to conform with a secular, materialist worldview?

Negro, I literally wanted to become a priest, I delved so far into my faith to the point of absurdity that I had to come out the other side. I was so damn scared of admitting the lack of faith to myself that I didn't even truely consider it until my high school graduation. When i become obsessed with something I start to analyze patterns and view it from an outside perspective, it was only a matter of time. You are just assuming me as some poser to create your 'argument' around. Don't act like you know who I am, or my faith in god

Important works can be sufficiently understood by only reading secondary sources.

No, if it's not supported at all by any other writers, archeological evidence, contextual clues, future references, or being even feasible given the time frame it's seen as unreliable or false. And you must look at history with a secular worldview, you can be religious yourself but secularism is a must in histography in order to seperate your biases from the research. Imagine using your logic in our fake news Era of history.
I sure bet the Romans descended from the Trojans and weren't just a etruscan proxy region, they even said it themselves in the text!

>Negro
He serious dawg

Why?

Thomas Pynchon has written the most heartbreaking and touching things I've ever read, and anyone who thinks he's "cold" is an awful reader or just a complete idiot. He can fuck you emotionally when he wants to, he just doesn't rely on making readers cry like 90% of shitty middlebrow lit

The 19th century was the absolute worst time for literature. Lengthy, character driven empty pits are fucking boring, no matter how well your *insert wealthy white man* main character is written

>And you must look at history with a secular worldview

Well, I happen to disagree.

All religious people are LARPers. You are one.

cool, just make sure to never publicly express your views and hold any expectations of people with basic historical knowledge to take you seriously. You do not use history to further your understanding of the human race through deciphering information left by the past but use it to confirm a religion or ideology

>Thomas Pynchon has written the most heartbreaking and touching things I've ever read

>how to spot someone who isn't wellread

Let's see who's read more, friend. I'm confident I've read a lot more than anyone over the age of 14 that still uses greentext to make a point.

By this logic you are implying a Catholic and a Muslim cannot have a discussion on Carthegian sailing techniques and how it was used to form their trade empire without it devolving into a religious argument. Going into history demands leaving yourself and your biases at the door, it's in the definition of a historian. Your opinion or judgement on the people of history doesn't matter, the job of a historian is understanding them and their acts, whether or not they are heretics in your eyes. It's exactly like applying your moral standards on everyone who ever lived and having it effect your study of them

Why should I take anyone who denies something like the Resurrection seriously?

>why should I take someone(the other 5 billion) seriously when they don't believe in my religion?

>redditor assblasted someone called him out for being a pynchonfag

wew

I don't really understand what your point is? That I'm a fan of Pynchon? Yeah, I absolutely am. It's okay to be too dumb for some things bud, just keep trying. I'm a fan of a lot more authors too, if you'd like to talk about them. My point is that I've read a lot of novels, and Pynchon has hit me as hard, emotionally, as almost anything else. What have you read from him? Do you disagree? Why?

Thinking that you need to be fluent in a foreign language in order to truly understand a work written in a foreign language is an extremely poor excuse that people use to not read great works.

20th century Chinese literature produced more interesting and complex stories than the Four Great Classical Novels.

The fiction novel is the epitome of literature and is superior to poetry, theater, and the short story.

>What have you read from him?
>crying lot
>bleeding edge

He's an overrated hack whom redditors adore because of >muh difficult prose. All in all, his stories lack depth and are superfluously dense. He's a poor man's Joyce, desu.

Also, I forgot to call you a faggot, faggot.

His worst two books. Fucking lol. God you're a fucking idiot. You're the most reddit person in this thread. You're clearly 12, please leave.

>His worst two books.
>reee the reason you don't like him is because you read his worst books, but he's really good, I tell you

Nice damage control, faggot.

Also,

>calling my a redditor when you're the faggot defending Reddit: The Writer

Everything you've said so far is either common opinion on reddit or so obnoxiously dumb that if you're not a troll you're in the wrong place.

right. and you'll still say all this when a clergymen takes a bullet for you one day in a shooting? shut up you child. who hurt you?

You're really bad at this. Most of reddit dislikes Pynchon because he's two difficult. Those are his two worst novels (poor little kiddo scared of long, difficult books.)
Nothing you've said is intelligent or funny. Discuss the novels with me, or tell me who you think is better. Or hid behind greentext and copy-paste insults, if you prefer. I'll go to sleep content knowing you couldn't come up with even one smart thing to say in response. Keep going, you're my entertainment while I shit.

So, you're admitting that you browse reddit?

*too
Phoneposting

Regularly. Outing idiots is almost as easy there as it is talking to you, friendo. Do you have anything intelligent to say yet?

Pynchon is sensationalist fiction; he won't be read past the next generation. Enjoy your ebin maymays and reddit while the rest of us adults read actual literature.

>you have to go back

What do you consider actual literature, friend? I'm open to discussing it, and I'm certain I've read it. It's a little pathetic that you're so scared of being challenged that you choose an author's two easiest, and worst, books and then write them off as bad. I can't imagine having to go through life being that unintelligent - how do you even manage to read at all? Just pick the easiest, shortest novels you can?

Prufrock is like, 10 times better then the waste land.

I really want to like Joyce -- I tried with Dubliners, tried Portrait and Ulysses. But man, it just seems like he writes about how paint draws and then styles it in an "interesting" way -- with references up the wazoo, with fractured speech, and so on -- to pretend that he's doing something cool.

But, at least with him, it just gets repetitive. And I find that it falls flat way too often for me (and of course the references going over the head).

In a nutshell, I feel like Proust does every single thing Joyce does except with significantly more impact and without his references being almost meant to shame you for not getting them.

oh fuck off back to r/atheism you absolute fucking loser

This is the best part about people like you. You get stuck when someone asks you to say anything with substance, and immediately retreat into making incorrect assumptions on their character. It's hilarious to watch. You can't respond to a single thing I've asked so you change the topic with every response. You're a fucking joke. A waste. At least I try to start real conversations. You'll never be a part of those interesting discussions you steal all of your opinions from, you'll always be the idiot that relies on this kind of bullshit to feel good about yourself. I don't you've read any Pynchon. I don't you've ever completed a novel in your life that didn't go completely over your head. Prove me wrong, say one intelligent thing. Try not to take the discussion off in another direction once again, confront your idiocy head on bud.

>post that picture alongside that foul language
>get those digits

spoopy

God does not care about words that are unrelated to religion. The swearing thing is really based on Quebecers' swear words, which are all based on frnech words related to the church. "Tabernacle, calisse (chalice), criss (christ), ciboire". I feel that only those words or other church words used as "swear words" such as "christ" or "damn" and all variations of church words apply to the "no swearing rule". Does that make sense?

Gonna save this to use against Trump supporters.

I had similar feelings as you a long time ago. I stopped being Christian in highschool because I felt like the Christianity I knew was not getting me the peace and knowldge I wanted. So I spent much time researching other faiths and philosophies, and by the time I came back to studying the Bible I was able to recognize much of the wisdom contained within it (alongside other texts). Theres a reason it has lasted this long.

I'm still no longer a Christian, but IMO the Bible remains one of the most profound texts ever written for its sheer depth and breadth of insight, but a book is only as good as you know how to read it...as pretentious as that sounds.

You should kill yourself, everyone would benefit. Seriously, think on it. You used the same tactic that you criticized me for using. Atheism is a disease. Let me add that I'm not even the person you were originally talking to, I just wanted to put you in your place for having the mental equivalent of a fucking peanut and having the audacity to consult an intellectual's message board and thinking you might fit in here. Go work in a fucking recycling factory you disgusting heretical insect.

top post

Where did you get that I'm an atheist? This is what I mean, you can't argue against anything I'm actually saying, so you do this. Absolutely pathetic. You consider yourself an intellectual? Say something intelligent. Argue any one of my points or shut your fucking mouth like the first idiot. You hide behind pre-written insults and nonsensical dysphemisms just like every other 16 year old on this board because you have nothing of value to contribute. What exactly do you disagree with on my original posts? Being butthurt and feeling inferior isn't a good enough reason to make a fool of yourself. I'm guessing you're going to create another fiction character trait for me so you can argue that instead because, like a teenage girl, that's the only tactic you have. Isn't it?

*doubt, obviously

Read hunger artist and delete this.

reading genre fiction is perfectly okay

So you're admitting that you have no capability of reasoning? That's what you said in your first line. You were just going through the motions anyway, you had no faith, despite what you want to believe just so you can delude yourself into thinking you've actually found the truth. If you're going to be intellectually dishonest, at least stop faking that you were ever one of us. Thanks.

>Say they are Christians
>Insulting random people and saying them to kill themselves
Jesus would be very proud of you, Christian dickheads

Studies show that belief is actually a stress response. The more stressed a person is, the more they believe in superstition/religion. There's just something nice about believing that there's this huge, all powerful force with your best interest at heart. I'm not religious, but I understand it, and there are millions of people who are perfectly nice.

desu most Veeky Forums Christians are doing it ironically for pseudo-nationalistic "deus vult" nonsense.

The message in a book is virtually non-existent and only matters in the mind of the writer

>enjoying reading
Do you know where you are?

>I don't dismiss them, I find there is reason to dismiss them.

>this is what atheists believe
It feels good to be your god/satan paradigm.

Reading anything is okay, technically. It's pretending you're doing the same thing as someone reading Ulysses that's the issue. Do what you want, but don't lie to yourself.

that's not hardcore contrarian though, many people agree on that one.

sure, i agree

>So you're admitting that you have no capability of reasoning? That's what you said in your first line

No I did not, I'm saying I've heard every argument and explanation, have understood their positions and still is can't take any of them seriously because they all hinge ok a fundamental disagreement that cannot be solved in any discussion, but go ahead and continue creating your little strawmen to base your 'argument' around

>You were just going through the motions anyway, you had no faith, despite what you want to believe just so you can delude yourself into thinking you've actually found the truth. If you're going to be intellectually dishonest, at least stop faking that you were ever one of us. Thanks.

Lmao you christcucks are so fucking hilarious, you literally just insulted me for not being capable of reasoning while you yourself aren't capable of reasoning. You can't even fathom someone who stops believing in a religion. Were the Aztecs just larping their religion before being converted to Christianity? How is it possible for them to move from one religion to another? How can anyone convert by this logic? If you aren't born a christian you cannot believe in the word of christ? On top of all this you just assume you know who I am and my life to gain any semblance of integrity after being a butthurt little faggot seeing someone critique your religion. At least attempt at making an argument with any semblance of maturity that doesn't devolve into "you weren't a true christian"

I understand it, but I just don't respect them. I'm not talking about spirituality or whatever, specifically organized religions with holy books and the like

>organized religions with holy books and the like
well, that's just superstition taken to the extreme, right? It starts with a superstitious belief, and then it just builds on itself.