Thread 24544184

To all these people coping with
>you say there are no good authors anymore because they will only only be recognized in a 100 years
Give me a break. Goethe and Byron were recognized during their lifetimes. Posthumous recognition was the exception. It’s just that we live in an age bereft of any creativity or originality. Those don’t drive demand in the modern, plebeian society. Slop does. Nobody will remember this era. We will go down in history as the age of slop.

>>24544184 (OP)
Peter Handke

>arguing against an imaginary opinion about books you haven’t read
Arguably the definitive /lit/ post

Creativity has never driven demand, but please, feel free to continue dooming about how particular and unique our time is compared to the glorious past.

>>24544390
>Creativity has never driven demand
Ahem
>The taste for literary pleasures must be very small among a democratic people. In aristocracies the higher classes alone have leisure to cultivate their intellects and to amuse themselves with literary pleasures. In democracies the people are all occupied with practical life; they cannot bestow long hours on the disinterested pursuit of knowledge or on elegant literature.

>>24544404
So basically the West fell because its aristocracy were enormous faggots who dedicated their lives to being the only people smart enough to squander their knowledge, as opposed to something else they could've achieved with it?

>>24544859
No, the West fell because aristocracy le bad and your average pleb cannot see merit in high literature as it has a high barrier for consoooooomption.
>inb4 Tocqueville was a liberal
Yes, he was a cuck. I’m aware.

>>24544874
Kys fagatroon.
The west fell because capitalism serves the lowest common denominator to the point that the aristocracy is now onions marvel action hero Elon musk.

>>24544888
>capitalism serves the lowest common denominator
Wow, thanks for reiterating what I just said!
>aristocracy is now onions marvel action hero Elon musk
You must be an American because you confuse oligarchy with aristocracy. Musk is a commoner just like you and me.

>>24544184 (OP)
You're absolutely right OP
Where technology has advanced, arts and literature have completely vanished.
There is no appreciation of any art, poetry, literature, music, architecture, philosophy, etc in the minds of either the common people nor the rich and powerful. It will be remembered as a cultural dark age.

>>24544184 (OP)
You know how everyone thinks the Greeks were really gay and they liked to touch little Greek boys? Sometimes I think about the era we live in and wonder if future people will think the same about us. Like in the year 4025 historians will be "the average American loved futa porn! Everyone had bottom surgery too. Obama, Johnny Depp, Mark Zuckerberg, they all had neo vaginas and enjoyed futa porn. They lived in the gayest society ever. Their art and entertainment was filled with LGBT shit. Look at all these trans flags we found in cemeteries. Look at all these Netflix titles about being gay or trans. We estimate roughly 90% of everyone was LGBT."

>>24544892
That is not what you said chief. U could easily have a democracy with plenty of leisure, think of athens. Democracy, no capitalism. If you think democracy is bland because the average person has no time you're right, that's also why they choose their leaders so poorly. So to raise society to a more even distribution of leisure time, not a return to some status exclusively. In an attempt to keep this exclusivity they have eroded the culture to the point that those with leisure time only consume the same garbage as those with less because it is designed to leave u hungry for more.

>>24544892
>Musk is a commoner
If nobility still mattered then Musk would simply buy a patent of nobility and join the aristocracy. Many members of the bourgeoisie did this historically.
Fundamentally, owners of large amounts of capital can outpace the nobility in terms of power acquisition, especially in an era of globalized trade. This was recognized by members of the aristocracy themselves which is why they took on the bourgeois function and became investors with the advent of industrialization. So, revolution or not, there would always be a degeneration of noble rights in some form.
This nostalgia for the aristocracy is really a tacit acknowledgement that there are aspects to life and society which we value that can't be expressed properly in a capitalist framework. The nostalgic and the socialist are two sides of the same coin.

>>24544945
>would simply buy a patent of nobility
Tocqueville describes it as one of the decadent things that lead to the French revolution in his book on the subject lol. The whole point of aristocracy is its exclusivity. Mixing classes together is asking for trouble because it naturally breeds these liberal ideas of equality, democracy, and so forth. Who honestly believes that a douche who bought a title is better than them? Not even the nobility took homines novi seriously. See Molière's Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme.

>>24544900
imagine how gay their society will be

Poetry and novels are dead. I don’t know why you guys can’t accept this. We’re just not that sort of civilization anymore.

>>24545044
>We’re
oh yeah what position did you play?
>>24544384
/thread