Anonymous
7/18/2025, 12:54:40 AM No.24559694
Damn this book is from 1884? Its quite out there a concept for what I'd expect from the time.
Replies:
Thread 24559694 - /lit/ [Archived: 205 hours ago]
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 1:05:24 AM No.24559710
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 11:40:56 AM No.24560739
>>24559694 (OP)
although I was not originally going to reply, seeing that it was bait, I realized I was already pissed and had already begun formulating a response in my mind and I knew I wouldn't be able to leave the topic for quite a while, so I thought I'd acknowledge it and tell you it was pretty good b8.
7/10 you fucking nigger
although I was not originally going to reply, seeing that it was bait, I realized I was already pissed and had already begun formulating a response in my mind and I knew I wouldn't be able to leave the topic for quite a while, so I thought I'd acknowledge it and tell you it was pretty good b8.
7/10 you fucking nigger
Replies:
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 1:25:37 PM No.24560861
>>24560739
It's not bait.
It's not bait.
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 3:48:05 PM No.24561074
>>24559694 (OP)
O watched the movie that was made from this and hated it
O watched the movie that was made from this and hated it
Replies:
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 4:28:07 PM No.24561135
>>24559694 (OP)
The post you’ve shared — expressing surprise that Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions was published in 1884 — is actually quite reasonable. It reflects a common reaction to the book’s unusual mix of math, satire, and speculative fiction, especially for the Victorian era. Let’s evaluate both the book and the comment in more depth:
---
About the Book: Flatland (1884) by Edwin A. Abbott
Overview:
A novella set in a 2D world inhabited by geometric shapes.
The protagonist, A Square, describes life in Flatland and his encounter with a 3D being from Spaceland.
The book blends mathematics, philosophy, and social satire.
Why it’s surprising for 1884:
Higher-dimensional space wasn’t mainstream thought yet. Mathematicians like Riemann and Gauss were exploring it, but public awareness was minimal.
Abbott uses the idea of dimensions metaphorically — to critique Victorian social hierarchy, classism, and gender roles.
The concept of beings unable to perceive higher dimensions as a metaphor for intellectual limitation or closed-mindedness was well ahead of its time.
---
Evaluation of the Post
Post says:
> "Damn this book is from 1884? It’s quite out there a concept for what I’d expect from the time."
Accurate reaction:
Flatland is shockingly modern in its abstract thinking and satire.
The book was not especially popular at the time of publication — its philosophical and mathematical themes only gained a cult following in the 20th century, especially among physicists and SF fans.
The surprise is warranted. Many 19th-century novels focused on realism, industrialization, or romantic ideals. A fictional universe of sentient shapes grappling with dimensionality and metaphysical concepts was highly unorthodox.
---
Why It’s Still Relevant
Cited in discussions of higher-dimensional geometry, relativity, and string theory.
Used in classrooms to teach dimensional reasoning.
Remains a clever example of how fiction can be used to challenge intellectual dogma and cultural norms.
---
Final Verdict:
The book is remarkably forward-thinking, and the post reflects a natural and valid sense of surprise.
Flatland stands out as a unique hybrid: math fiction, dystopia, and social satire, decades before such genres formally existed. Abbott was doing what few others in his time were: thinking in more dimensions — literally and figuratively.
The post you’ve shared — expressing surprise that Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions was published in 1884 — is actually quite reasonable. It reflects a common reaction to the book’s unusual mix of math, satire, and speculative fiction, especially for the Victorian era. Let’s evaluate both the book and the comment in more depth:
---
About the Book: Flatland (1884) by Edwin A. Abbott
Overview:
A novella set in a 2D world inhabited by geometric shapes.
The protagonist, A Square, describes life in Flatland and his encounter with a 3D being from Spaceland.
The book blends mathematics, philosophy, and social satire.
Why it’s surprising for 1884:
Higher-dimensional space wasn’t mainstream thought yet. Mathematicians like Riemann and Gauss were exploring it, but public awareness was minimal.
Abbott uses the idea of dimensions metaphorically — to critique Victorian social hierarchy, classism, and gender roles.
The concept of beings unable to perceive higher dimensions as a metaphor for intellectual limitation or closed-mindedness was well ahead of its time.
---
Evaluation of the Post
Post says:
> "Damn this book is from 1884? It’s quite out there a concept for what I’d expect from the time."
Accurate reaction:
Flatland is shockingly modern in its abstract thinking and satire.
The book was not especially popular at the time of publication — its philosophical and mathematical themes only gained a cult following in the 20th century, especially among physicists and SF fans.
The surprise is warranted. Many 19th-century novels focused on realism, industrialization, or romantic ideals. A fictional universe of sentient shapes grappling with dimensionality and metaphysical concepts was highly unorthodox.
---
Why It’s Still Relevant
Cited in discussions of higher-dimensional geometry, relativity, and string theory.
Used in classrooms to teach dimensional reasoning.
Remains a clever example of how fiction can be used to challenge intellectual dogma and cultural norms.
---
Final Verdict:
The book is remarkably forward-thinking, and the post reflects a natural and valid sense of surprise.
Flatland stands out as a unique hybrid: math fiction, dystopia, and social satire, decades before such genres formally existed. Abbott was doing what few others in his time were: thinking in more dimensions — literally and figuratively.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 4:43:11 PM No.24561180
>>24561162
After i read this summary i realized why a chud would hate it.
After i read this summary i realized why a chud would hate it.
Replies:
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 4:49:12 PM No.24561190
>>24561180
A chud would take it at face value and love it though. Many did,the author had to explain that no it was satire and he doesn't actually think women are mindless and dangerous hysterics and that eugenics is right
A chud would take it at face value and love it though. Many did,the author had to explain that no it was satire and he doesn't actually think women are mindless and dangerous hysterics and that eugenics is right
Replies:
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 5:18:49 PM No.24561244
>>24561190
>american history x is really pro racist
I thought they were just pretending to be dumb cuz le epic troll
>american history x is really pro racist
I thought they were just pretending to be dumb cuz le epic troll
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 5:56:29 PM No.24561305
>>24561074
A big part of what makes the book great is the really eloquent and clear prose.
>>24561190
>the author had to explain that no it was satire and he doesn't actually think women are mindless and dangerous hysterics and that eugenics is right
It doesn’t matter what he intended (the old priest probably was an arch-misogynist anyway come on), he wrote one of the greatest chud cultivation epics in the history of literature. This is what death of the author means.
A big part of what makes the book great is the really eloquent and clear prose.
>>24561190
>the author had to explain that no it was satire and he doesn't actually think women are mindless and dangerous hysterics and that eugenics is right
It doesn’t matter what he intended (the old priest probably was an arch-misogynist anyway come on), he wrote one of the greatest chud cultivation epics in the history of literature. This is what death of the author means.