2
18

[–] piratse 2 points 18 points (+20|-2) ago 

I've been having this argument since Jr. High. Teacher: "The author was using the lake as a metaphor for the struggle of women and the fight for the cost of yarn in 1596."

Me: "Or he needed to set a location and a fucking lake worked for the story."

People who analyze literature have turned writers into savant level geniuses that were thinking 80 levels deep in every sentence they wrote. My mom was published several times (books) and wrote for magazines and shit, trust me, they aren't thinking that fucking deep. And when they ARE making a connection to something, it's usually pretty obvious.

0
5

[–] second_mouse 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Well, they specialized in something, they have to justify their title.

0
2

[–] chance_pictures 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The best authors and artists are absolutely aware of the associations and forms they're employing in their art. That's what we call literature and high art. Some artists do it by accident, like JK Rowling. I think a lot of the associations she made were happenstance, and I'd be surprised if she writes anything as culturally significant as Harry Potter again, if you can concede that it was.

I'm not defending Lit classes like in the above meme. They're shit. But don't shit on good, true Humanities, cause this would be an even shittier world if we didn't preserve the critical studies of art, and they're being done away with because of the mere existence of libtards. Every jacked hard-science nerd thinks we're fucking finger-painting. I'll finger-paint you sticking a finger up your own ass. Yeah, you personally. :)

0
2

[–] HarveyHarveyJones 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Totally agree. Beautifully put. If I picked up the great gatsby without a teacher to guide me, I would have probably grown old with the book. But my english teacher taught me that some things might be a certain way for certain intentions. Why was it a green light and not a red one. Regardless it taught me to make connections not so originally clear. My teacher taught me that.

1
-1

[–] HWY__395 [S] 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

down with copyrights!

0
2

[–] HarveyHarveyJones 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Copyrights actually exist for pretty legitimate reasons.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
12

[–] Sir_Ocaz 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

It can be, that's besides the point. Books mostly are subjective. The bigger problem is the fact that they don't even take your thought process into account and try understanding you, nope, it's deemed wrong and you're given a shitty grade because you don't think like them.

It's the juiciest example of why mass education is nothing but a tool for subversion.

0
2

[–] chance_pictures 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The best classes I've ever taken ask you, "now what do you think?" Most of those classes have been Literature, all taught by one good professor. I feel like I'm very much in the minority here.

0
10

[–] SuperSaiyanCock 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Gotta love liberal arts bs programs in school.

You don't get this shit with math and most science studies.

0
2

[–] DrumpfBTFO 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

well, how do you explain 2^7-1 in gematria...

edit: bad joke, communist is 127, but apparently when searching 127 in gematria, first result is facebook.

0
0

[–] TherealScrable 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This is because Math and Science isn't subjective...

Sadly fakes still exist, but these can be outted as fakes...

There is no right or wrong in for example philosophy, literature, morals, politics...

0
5

[–] OcculusResurrectio 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

This perfectly encapsulates why I hated reading when I was younger.

0
2

[–] moginspace 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

There is also the notion that whatever the author's biological background or whatever doesn't need to be taken into context. The notion is called Death of the Arthor Once I found out about it, I learned to better enjoy entertainment I consume be it books, movies, music, etc.

The idea being the work stands for itself and its interpretation is up to the individual reader. Each reader may take something different and that's okay and valid. If person A thinks "the blue curtains" mean depression, person B thinks "the curtains were blue" and person "C thinks this book sucks either way!" All are valid points according to the death of the author notion. But in my brief experience, literature teachers have a "right answer" for every question they ask and it's usually not up for debate if you think otherwise.

0
2

[–] Kcpedogate 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

This is exactly it! I'm an english major in college and I was thinking about this today. We try and extrapolate so much more out of text than there actually is, and the author probably had no grand schemes, and would think we were crazy. The problem is that when you get your doctorate in literature, you have to write a disortation about something completely original. Since most of the classics have been around for years, you have people writing about the meaning hidden inside the color of the drapes. And the PhDs will write a 100 page article about it! As a student you have to read this article and then write a 10 page paper about there being a wrinkle in the drapes that was not pointed out in the original article. You play the game, and learn to babble, like I'm doing now. Then they teach you to be brief and not ramble. In summary, it's exhausting.

0
2

[–] Urist_Joyce 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Depends on the author. Reading Joyce is like the extremety, where for every paragraph you read, you can write a book explaining it's meaning. Sometimes these "deeper" meanings can be very intertaining if you overthink every little detail, but the best part about reading such books is that you end up reading "less complicated" books at double speed. The key to "thinking deep" is to connect such references with very basic, everyday stuff, then combine it with an abstract meaning and you can make whatever you like out of a story while not really being out of topic.

For example I am struggling with Ulysses about 4-5 pages a day, but I finished The Alchemist by Coelho in 2 days.

0
2

[–] wallstreets 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I still vividly remember one of my high school English teachers not thinking the animals in life of pi were metaphorical. He had a doctorate...

load more comments ▼ (7 remaining)