A board of people who think in memes and whose favorite book is Moby Dick disapprove of Harry Potter for reliance on...

A board of people who think in memes and whose favorite book is Moby Dick disapprove of Harry Potter for reliance on cliche.

A solid mixture of projecting and failure to realize Veeky Forums is a large group of people and not one single individual

Good job!

>Not everyone who voted for Trump is a bigot!

> Solid mixture

>think in memes
No worse than the rest of the internet.
>whose favorite book is Moby Dick
I'm pretty sure that Ulysses was on the first place in the last poll.
>disapprove of Harry Potter for reliance on cliche.
And a ton of other things.
So, you're implying that Moby Dick is cliched, right?

My favorite book isn't Moby Dick! It's Ulysses!

>Not all of my posts are bait!

What other things? Also, Ulysses... My favorite band is the fucking Beatles. And defending yourself by saying you're no worse than the rest of the internet?
Dismiss it as bait. That's an original answer.

>comes to Veeky Forums
>defends normie media
>uses the word bigot

Yes, it's bait

>What other things? Also, Ulysses... My favorite band is the fucking Beatles. And defending yourself by saying you're no worse than the rest of the internet?
You didn't really answer my question here...

So this... this is the power of women...

Touche'

>Didn't really answer my question
Let me spell it out: you all are less original than a classic rock radio station. Saying Ulysses or Moby Dick is your favorite book is the equivalent of saying Led Zeppelin is your favorite band. The discussion never rises above idiots calling other idiots "plebs" because they don't like fucking Shakespeare enough. How many times do we have to listen to Behind Blue Eyes?

Case in point.

If it's bait, it's bait that not one of you can offer a cogent response to.

Don't make fun of my Freudian love of Dick, whether Moby or Mocha.

Originality for the sake of originality is for smelly liberal queers. This board is concerned with eternal quality not slavishly looking for recognition from whatever is arbitrarily fashionable among metropolitan dykes

The Rolling Stones are for all time, man! If there's one opinion here that isn't borrowed from a Harold Bloom interview (not even a book - you all couldn't be bothered to read so much as that) then Aristotle was fucking Chinese.

Don't disrespect Mr Bloom, he's read a great deal more than you ever will

People hate on stuff that Bloom likes here all the time newfag. Like Walt Whitman.

I don't disapprove of HP, I just don't really consider it any longer. I know it has its place, but I don't feel that place is here. I could tick off reasons, but why bother? Here's two anyway- 1. It's poorly written (unlike Watership Down, for instance). 2. One must be 18 to post here.

The Beatles were brilliant. Rolling Stones were always shit

>This board is concerned with eternal quality not slavishly looking for recognition from whatever is arbitrarily fashionable among metropolitan dykes

You'll notice I said dykes, not a word that rhymes with it

Well, actually you forgot Poland.

Calling something "poorly written" or "god-tier" is precisely the type of meaningless nonthought that the people you take your opinions from accuse Harry Potter of.

>Let me spell it out: you all are less original than a classic rock radio station. Saying Ulysses or Moby Dick is your favorite book is the equivalent of saying Led Zeppelin is your favorite band.
Thank you for spelling this out because I don't know how I'm supposed to come to such a nonsensical conclusion. Demanding originality of art and demanding originality of opinions are two separate issues. You can shove your ingenious argument up your asshole.

>The discussion never rises above idiots calling other idiots "plebs" because they don't like fucking Shakespeare enough.
So we should instead...?

So we should demand originality from neither.

It sounds like OP is a /mu/ retard who wants to exchange sincere appreciation for meme opinions and poseuring

I sincerely appreciate the comfy prose of Don Quixote and I don't even need the daily reminder that Proust was god-tier. And I hate all that pleb trash like Infinite Jest because it doesn't have any discernible talent.

Why?

Who is defending normie media?

You sure as fuck aren't, since you're attacking Veeky Forums's likes and dislikes, but haven't once given us even a glimpse of your apparently exemplary taste.

You really think this is about taste?

Non-thought? It doesn't require alot of thought to discern whether or not something is made well, especially if (you) have alot of experience in the product so presented. In another thread current now I wrote that I gave up reading The Davinci Code after three paragraphs. And why? (Here's a meme:) Because it's shit. If (you) want a disquisition, provide one. Youre the one who wants something for nothing.
But I'll tell (you) what, give an instance of Rowling's rhetorical brilliance and [we'll] argue from there.

Again, who is defending Rowling?

Oh nonono sorry for my bad word choice, this is actually about our highly informed aesthetic principles and philosophies. Veeky Forums is bad because it doesn't treat art and their opinions the same way. Art should be original and opinions should be original. Novels should have well-developed, realistic characters and opinions should have well-developed, realistic characters.

I genuinely hope OP gets AIDS

What cliches are in Moby-Dick? Considering when it was written it was highly original. Beyond the deep archetypes, the Hero's Journey and so on, it's not really filled with many cliches.

Explicitly, no one. Implicitly, OP. Or the attack's a cipher.

What was the last opinion you saw on Veeky Forums? I've only ever seen ratings of "patrician or pleb" (sometimes you can get even higher than patrician with a Harold Bloom stamp of approval) I've never seen anyone say anything - original or otherwise - about Moby Dick.

Not really the point

(You) get it? Melville's not being dispraised either. At issue then is a relatively small horde of persons 'who think in memes.' What then is the subject whereby this can be disproved? Punchline: one isn't provided. There's some non-meme thinking for (you), retard. Or do (you) disagree?

the subject whereby this can be disproved? what does that mean?

Oh, brother..
Youre as neutral as this thread is empty, or 'bogus.' That's my counter-charge. Defend against it.

There are plenty of people who have read beyond the entry level stuff here as well if you stay in good threads, obviously bait threads and metathreads (like this one) will contain no discussion, please try to contribute and bring out the good posters if that's what you'd like to see. This isn't going to bring them out, at the very least. Also, there's a hell of a lot of classic literature out there to read from the past couple of millennia and I don't think the 70's cockrock comparison really does this fact justice.

The original charge is definitely neutral about specific book recommendations. It's a general charge to say something. Fucking anything.

But here're some recommendations that are not even remotely controversial, but which no one here ever talks about:
Our Mutual Friend
Nothing Like the Sun
The Moons of Jupiter
Finding a Girl in America
The Marble Faun
A Thousand Acres
The Rabbit Trilogy
Star Maker


Every attempt has failed. I once managed to get a discussion about infinite jest, but that was it.

Cockrock comparison absolutely does it justice. I see Moby Dick about 10 times a day. I've never seen a Confidence Man thread, let alone Pierre. No B-sides to speak of. You don't even hardly see Dickens threads in here, let alone the lesser known classics. Compare a list of Bantam or Signet classics to what gets discussed here.

If youre referring to Updike, the Rabbit series is a bit more than a trilogy. Whereas Our Mutual Friend IS a great novel that's rarely if ever mentioned, the Marble Faun marks Hawthorne as sadly depleted. Blithedale gets a nod every once in awhile, but few answer. I personally think Hawthorne's best is 7 Gables but no one here so much as drops the title, as if it were poison or something. Point is, everyone who posts here likes stuff that does not make the general rounds- this I believe is a generally acknowledged 'feel'- in my case late James, Hoffmann, Dana, a handful of women, a handful of Edwardian novelists, about 15 poets (I really love A.R. Ammons, for instance) but that's o.k. Every week brings new surprises and threads that actually work. Good ones too. Theyre not so rare as many tend or want to believe.

What! Rarely is American WW trashed here, nor should he be. Ever.
Interesting thread.

>This board is concerned with eternal quality
Imagine typing this unironically

Imagine being such an ironic tryhard actual passion makes you feel threatened