Thread 24792874

Why hasn’t a woman written a masterpiece? Nothing they have written can really be compared to Joyce or Shakespeare or Cervantes. I always chuckle when holes try to compare Middlemarch to Paradise Lost as if they are even in the same ballpark.

>>24792874 (OP)
Charlie Bone was dope and a woman wrote it

>>24792874 (OP)
Have you ever met a woman? If you have the first thing that stands out about their character is that they're incredibly dumb.

There are more women who have read Jane Austen than have read Cervantes. For all the posturing by men about pretentious shit like James Joyce and intertextuality, the reality is that most men don't read because they're too busy playing video games and the majority of men who do read probably read to impress women. If you're one of the very few men who read for your own pleasure you're probably not the kind to be seething about how much better men are at reading than women, so fuck off and go play Anime Titty Games 4, faggot.

>>24792893
>reee you’re an incel gamer
You can tell a hole wrote this post because it doesn’t engage with the OP at all.

>>24792874 (OP)
They have written masterpieces. Just nothing Joyce-level.

>>24792874 (OP)
Middlemarch is a masterpiece, shithead

>>24792874 (OP)
is Kristin Lavransdatter a masterpiece? I havent read it but she got a nobel prize and whatever country shes from put her on their money, most importantly she was very cute when she was young

>>24792896
They're so dumb bro.

>>24792900
You've never read Genji.

>>24792896
It's a fact that women read much more than men. Saying that women haven't written a classic is stupid because it's the minority of men who do read congratulating an even smaller minority of men who write on their awesome man writing. Meanwhile, women are reading and writing books are a much greater rate. I don't think you're capable of even understanding this point because you're a cumbrain retard.

>>24792874 (OP)
>Why hasn’t a woman written a masterpiece?
Tolstoy was a woman.

>>24792916
Toots, you need to get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich. Tell me what living female author you’re referring to that wrote anything close to Mason and Dixon?

>>24792916
>Meanwhile, women are reading and writing books are a much greater
Yeah but they're all dumb.

>>24792916
how come women were writing all these books back in the day but nobody is still talking about any of them, why do they lack staying power?

>>24792924
Mason and Dixon is shit and Thomas Pynchon is woke, faggot.

>>24792934
They're dumb. Women don't want to engage with this point because they're just smart enough to know they can't win.

>>24792937
Extra mayo on the sandwich hon

>>24792934
What are you on about? There's loads of study that happens about historic female authors in academia. Do you just mean they aren't one of the 4 male authors that get spammed on /lit/ constantly? lmfao

>>24792937
>Thomas Pynchon is woke
based

men: what if I rendered into iambic pentameter a poem about the timeless struggle of good vs evil
women: what if a billionaire werewolf pirate kept an average looking personalityless woman as a sex slave and even though he could have any women he chose her and he violently raped her but in a good way

>>24792943
There’s loads of academic studies on African authors too. Doesn’t mean they have written anything close to a masterpiece. DEI universities have to do that anyways or the communist governors will cut their funding.

>>24792874 (OP)
Pride and Prejudice is widely considered a masterpiece. If your criteria for masterpiece is "Shakespeare", then Joyce or Cervantes haven't written one either. If it's just your personal opinion, it's as worthless as the ones you attempt to ridicule.

>>24792950
If your definition of a masterpiece is ''I like it'' and you only like things that were written are based and redpilled according to your definition, yeah, obviously no woman has written a masterpiece, but you're a faggot gamer cumbrain and nobody cares. It doesn't change that women write and read as well as attempt academia at a higher rate than men do. All you have is stubbornness that asserts men are the best like a 12 year old boy in a playground. All the facts are against you.

>>24792964
>attempt academia
Nice Freudian slip. I’m sure plenty of women attempt to write things, sounds like we both know they aren’t successful which is why you can’t point to anything worthwhile written by a woman ever, let alone the past 50 years.

>>24792957
the only masterpieces in world literature are hamlet and faust

>>24792969
>says women can't engage with the point
>doesn't engage with the point
ah yes, a tranny cumbrain

>>24792916
>It's a fact that women read much more than men
Women read mostly porn; they're porn addicts.
https://youtu.be/ffvRhsViyIQ
>writing books are a much greater rate
Prose quality is at an all time low.
https://youtu.be/8ynCVmw5AWk

The male vs female IQ distribution samples not only serve as a representation of the fundamental difference between men and women, but also as a reliable analogy for pretty much every single field of human thought and skill.

Women always occupy the middle ground of being acceptably competent.

Men occupy the extremes. They are more often than not either absolutely terrible, or exceptionally brilliant at everything.

A woman can be good at something, but she will never reach the ranks of a 0.1% male at the top of his craft.

There will never be a female Tolstoy. There will never be a female Edward Witten.

>>24792943
>There's loads of study that happens about historic female authors in academia
ESL or just retarded?

>>24792980
There will also never be a woman who makes threads as shit as this one.

>>24792976
>tranny cumbrain
Are you mad that George Eliot was a repressed trans man and the greatest literary work a “woman” has ever written still required a touch of the male?

>>24792874 (OP)
>Why hasn’t a woman written a masterpiece?
The one who wrote Legacy of Kain.

>>24792976
Lol

>>24792987
Are you assuming OP's gender?

>>24792899
Virginia Woolf is better than Joyce

>>24793000
>>24793001
>hive mind

>>24793000
>>24793001
The world needs god, desperately.

>>24793003
The retardation is spreading. We must lock down the thread.

>>24792995
Yes, the OP is a tranny who hates women because he was born a male and to excuse his own mediocrity he bashes them, wishing he was born a woman so his failures as a man wouldn't be so bad.

>>24792980
>A woman can be good at something, but she will never reach the ranks of a 0.1% male at the top of his craft. There will never be a female Tolstoy. There will never be a female Edward Witten
Yeah, men were destined for greatness or shame. Women were destined for mediocrity

>>24793017
source on the bloom pic?

>>24793017
>>24793028
Fags are gross and without oppression the 0.00001% who could produce art are too busy spreading parasites on grinder.

The problem with women - besides being dumb, which they continue to refuse to engage with, by the way - is that they are completely opposed to truth. Their nature and everything they do is centered around lies and deception.

>>24792980
Middlemarch is better than Anna Karenina

>>24793001
No, she wasn't. In fact, she was seething about Joyce so bad to the point she started making racist remarks about him being Irish.

>>24792970
Both supremely overrated

>>24793003
>>24793005
>>24793008
>>24793064
none of you have read her.

>>24792980
I see no reason to believe that literary skill is analogous to mathematical problem solving. If your argument were correct then we should expect those with the highest IQs to be the best writers and vice versa but there's little evidence of that.

>>24793083
that's because being good at math requires autistic dedication to it to the detriment of everything else

>>24793047
The First Circle mogs both.

There is the whole IQ bell curve argument (men being the most retarded and the most genius), but I don't think that gets to the heart of things. On a sociological level, they are also less incentivized towards greatness i.e. a “great woman" is not valued as much as a "great man". But this still lacks explanatory power.

Women are overly socialized. They are by nature communalistic and consensus-driven. This means that originality is much less likely from a woman. And even the great works written by women (Middlemarch, Virginia Woolf’s works, Jane Austen) are more or less derivative. They are good students, but usually that is all. This is also partly why MFA literature is dominated by women. The most talented women will go to all the right institutions, incorporate all the "right" technique, but never innovate beyond this, nor think critically about the world in a truly original way. Their philosophy is always mediated and tempered by what consensus and broader society tells them it should be, by nature of their sex, which possesses a weaker and more cowardly spirit. As a result, women lack true individuality, and therefore their work lacks the originality of perspective required of greatness.

Beyond this, women are fundamentally carnal creatures. Men have a carnal side as well, but they also possess a duality inside them (spirit and body), and have the ability to suppress their carnality in favor of a higher ideal. By contrast, women in their being are ruled by their emotions and sexuality, and therefore lack a true sense of morality, therefore possessing a fundamentally Jewish character. Women cannot know Platonic love, only the fleeting feeling of romantic love. They cannot know the love of an absolute ideal, which is a crucial component of genius.

>>24793094
>therefore possessing a fundamentally Jewish character
You lost me here chief

>>24793094
>therefore possessing a fundamentally Jewish character

You gave away the satire too easily there bro.

Women don't have the intelligence to be great writers like William Faulkner, George Eliot, or Charles Dickens.

>>24793083
>literary skill is analogous to mathematical problem solving

I didn't say that. I said the IQ distribution differences between the sexes are analogous to other fields of human knowledge and skill. Women occupy the middle ground, men occupy the extremes.

>>24793114
>george eliot
Totally not a tranny and definitely a real woman btw

>>24793126
>ugly women don't exist! it's all men!

>>24793126
By the way, you know that whole theory about how historical portrait painters would portray their subjects as far more attractive than they really are?

Her wikipedia page confirms this theory as unequivocally, undeniably true.

Look at the fucking difference between her portrait and her photograph.

>>24793126
>>24793133
That's a man

>>24793126
looks like your typical angloid woman

>>24793139
nah, just an average english rose. you know the joke about why the english became good sailors? it's all true

>>24793128
He has a 5 oclock shadow and prominent Adam’s apple lol what is this cope and trans erasure

>>24792874 (OP)
Ayn Rand is probably the closest, though calling anything that she wrote "a masterpiece" is a bit of a stretch

can't believe no one ITT has mentioned Mary Shelley yet

you retards don't actually read lmao

>>24793171
We are talking about masterpieces not 3rd rate mediocrity. What has she written that compares to Ulysses?

>>24793171
Everybody knows Percy wrote Frankenstein.

>>24793179
Mary Shelley essentially invented science fiction by writing Frankenstein

you haven't read Ulysses all the way through, so please stop malding about it

>>24793186
No, he didn't. He was the editor.

>>24793198
Sure, if you think editing means rewriting the entire book to not be about getting raped by an inhuman monster.

>>24793028
https://youtu.be/VcZbZ36qh4U?si=hE77Fr9sYLYCe1xm
>>24793040
You're talking about party-gays, who oftentimes are traumatized by religious fanatics

>>24793193
As much as Aldiss is a great writer I despise him for introducing this faggot notion to the world

>>24792874 (OP)
Nice tits

>>24792874 (OP)
read woolf retard

>>24793064
>racist remarks
>about him being Irish
Lmao

>>24793486
That dogface bitch Virginia Woof was just Leonard in drag prove me wrong (you can't)

>>24792906
Norwegian.
Coincidentally, the aunt of Rollo and Gorm the Old of Denmark (Gorm = alias of Tore "Teiande" of Norway, Rollos brother) is the only known female author of the OG surviving Norse sagas.

>>24792950
>communist governors
you just might be the most retarded person in the entire thread.

>>24793565
Hey, he's not a woman.

>>24793565
How do you think the CCP is organized

>>24793568
what does the CCP have to do with amerikan universities?

>>24793571
>he doesn’t know

>>24793574
lol. but still china has absolutely nothing to do with communism. its just as capitalistic as amerika

>>24792916
>It's a fact that women read much more than men.
They read porn. For their vagina tingles. That's like bragging that men are better film enjoyers because they watch porn, or consume more visual art because they read hentai manga.

>>24793575
>real communism has never been tried
Oh boy...

>>24793577
that's a complete non sequitur lmao. china was socialist up to '76. maybe actually read something before making retarded posts.

>>24793581
Here we go again...

>>24793595
Wrong one

>>24793186
This.
>>24793198
There's a guy who spent decades studying Frankenstein. Originally he aggressively defended against any idea Percy had a major role in writing the book but he came around like 20 years ago and begrudgingly admitted Percy's contributions were substantial.

>>24793595
"Not real communism" faggots are the most intellectually stunted midwits imaginable. They make people with TDS look smart by comparison.

>>24793604
and what does that have to do with chinese revisionism?

>>24792874 (OP)
>pic

Memes aside, IQ is not a real factor in the strength of a novelist, being too intelligent can even be a hindrance. And a masterpiece is anything the majority believes it to be, therefore there have been many masterpieces written by women. Who cares anyway, art is about expression and soul, not autistic comptetition.

>>24793633
again, what does this have to do with the current day revisionism of the CCP? I get that you haven't read Marx, let alone Mao, but still...

>>24793614
Not that guy but it's true the US has been actively sabotaging attempts at communism since the 50s, Korea, Vietnam, Venezuela, Cuba. The only countries who haven't been successfully bullied into capitalist submission have been countries with nukes like China and North Korea.

Side tangent: get nukes and keep them. If Ukraine didn't forfeit their nuclear weapons in a deal with the US they wouldn't be in their current mess. Mutually assurred destruction is the only thing that keeps imperialist niggers in line.

>>24793645
read marx, not wikipedia...

>>24793647
>right back to real communism has never been tried
Wikipedia is full of Marxist editors, but surely they and all communist countries are wrong and you are right.

>>24793654
not everyone who proclaims themselves marxist is marxist, you retard. do you even know what revisionism means? fucking hell, what has lit turned into...

>>24793660
>no true scotsman
Of coouuuuurrrssseeee. Naturally where this was going.

>>24793666
oh well. my fault for expecting a mutt to understand anything.

>>24793669
Non-sequitor.

>fallacy andy
brown

>>24793683
He would break his hand if he tried to punch me with that

>>24792874 (OP)
Where did she get those

>>24793643
>These poor innocent communist totalitarian dictatorships were just going about their own business building utopias and the mean old USA ruined everything!
Fuck you people are retards.

Middlemarch is pretty good op

>>24793720
Salvador Allende, notorious dictator.

>>24792874 (OP)
Blackpill: most books “written” by men were written by their wives and just published by the men. Most males are functionally illiterate for deep-seated neurological reasons.

>>24793762
Get a load of this hole

>>24792874 (OP)
Read Willa Cather

>>24793736
Seeing as the commies in his coalition wanted to take over parliament and establish a dictatorship I'd say he was nipped in the bud.
>NOOOOOO, THE SOCIALIST UTOPIA IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER THIS TIME I SWEAR
Fuck off, retard.

>>24792874 (OP)
why hasn’t an ovum ever outrun a sperm cell?
woman is the form everything moves toward.
there would be no masterpieces if there weren’t any women either. all true poetry is matriarchal in origin. the most venerated poem in the west, the iliad, starts off ‘sing to me, o goddess.’

>>24793576
For example, the current NYT bestseller is yet another tome of romantasy slop. This one is about a girl kidnapped, imprisoned, and raped by a necromancer until she develops stockholm syndrome and falls in love with him.
The publishing industry is just a bunch of female authors and readers gooning to 600+ page rape fantasies.

>>24792874 (OP)
you must be new like new new this has been a flannery o'connor board since forever

>>24793720
history is written by the victors indeed

>>24793762
Impossible, a woman would never be so selfless and generous to a man.

>>24793908
>my entire understanding of history can be expressed by a cliche
Yep. You guys are retards.

>>24793911
>maybe if i say retard over and over people will think I'm correct
retard

>>24793912
The rationale for calling you a retard was in the greentext, retard.

>>24793935
You are fat and brown, retard.

>>24793939
>can't think of an original insult and has to go with brown/fat
Lol, retard.

>>24792893
I love women don't get me wrong, but I think objectively speaking they are far, far more likely to only read contemporary fiction. The literary canon consists almost entirely of male authors so naturally they feel alienated. In consequence they are less inclined to read works of fiction that are aesthetically, philosophically edifying, that are so good that they continue to be relevant and enjoyed by readers generation after generation. This to me seems like a fairly uncontroversial observation.

>>24792874 (OP)
Too busy getting their tits sucked by (You)r trully.

>>24792874 (OP)
you almost had me there

>>24793942
sez u, retard

>>24792893
This anon is right

>>24793945
Maybe if you self select for readers first. Male readers are more likely to read the canon because men are generally more interested in being impressive, building their resume, etc. Not saying all canon readers are like this, but a good many are.
Men are so unlikely to read though that your average woman is more likely to read classics than your average man, especially if you include stuff like Austen and the Brontes.

>>24793608
Kek, I asked my Romantics professor about this once and he instantly knew who I was talking about. He said the sperg goes to every conference and submits to every magazine trying to convince all the others, but they mainly ignore his schizo ramblings. My professor said that the common belief is that Percy probably helped edit the book, but it was largely written by Mary

>>24792874 (OP)
A woman wrote the most popular and influential series of novels ever. More people enjoy Rowling than Joyce and Shakespeare and Cervantes combined. Popularity is the only true measure of objective quality. Anything else is appeal to authority cope.

>>24792893
I don't think men read to impress women. I think they read to impress other men. Stuff like the /lit/ 100 is basically just a way of keeping score.

>>24794345
>Popularity is the only true measure of objective quality.
>Anything else is appeal to authority cope.
That's literally an appeal to authority cope.

>>24794345
Have you read James Whitcomb Riley?

>>24793094
>t. Otto Anoninger

>>24793000
Literally the most overrated writer in the history of writing. A spoiled, self-centered retard.

>>24793081
I've read To the Lighthouse, Orlando, The Waves, and Between the Acts. The only one I thought was overrated was Orlando but it had its moments.

>>24794344
Cool but the guy was widely respected until he said Percy had contributed substantially to Frankenstein and he still minimizes it as much as he can. Either you're lying, your professor is retarded, or it's a different guy.

>>24794424
I've had this exact conversation on this website before, and I remember taking away that you might just be that guy. If that's the case, they're never gonna invest in your ramblings bro

>>24794431
>I've made the same appeal to authority and been called out by multiple anons
Sucks to be you.

>>24793608
who’s the guy

>>24794454
Can't remember. He published an edition of Frankenstein around 2010 that highlighted Percy's contributions and feminists had a meltie.

>>24794476
not charles e robinson? he never said percy’s contributions were ‘substantial.’ he said his role was that of literary editor and stylistic advisor, not a co-writer.

>>24794440
No shot. Are the the anon that goes from thread to thread pointing out the sama fallacy incorrectly, too? Holy shit, how many conversations have we had? Also kek at you claiming appeal to authority when the initial argument was based on some scholar spend "decades" studying to come to some conclusion and that was the only evidence provided. This board man

>>24794483
If that's all he said the fact that saying it set off a shit storm of seethe should clue you in to embedded biases, anon.
>>24794487
>pointing out the sama fallacy incorrectly, too
Again, not me. You need to take a break from this website, bud.
>Also kek at you claiming appeal to authority
I noticed I should have said "anecdotal appeal to authority" right after I posted but I didn't think you'd be enough of a faggot to cry about it.

Get a life, bro.

>>24794513
the fact that you’ve apparently cited this story a few times but never cared to remember the scholar’s name is telling. starting to wonder you really care about evidence or some personal agenda.

>>24794522
>the fact that you’ve apparently cited this story a few times
What the fuck are you talking about? Are you samefagging or something?
>never cared to remember the scholar’s name
I'm posting on 4chan. I'm not writing an essay on the authorship or Frankenstein you pretentious pseud.
>telling
Ah, you were setting up a "no you". Lol.
>starting to wonder you really care about evidence or some personal agenda
You're projecting an awful lot to the point it's pretty creepy. This is probably why you've been friendzoned by every girl you've ever been attracted to, if they even let you get that close, despite the fact you anonymously defend Mary Shelley's reputation as if you're an esteemed expert.

Again: get a life.

They keep laughing at me and won't take me seriously.

>>24794539
You should go after girls like the sneaky link one. She isn't the prettiest of the bunch but she gives off pick me vibes and the hair flip indicates she's probably has some moves.

Women just don't live the same lives men do. There was a point over the last century where a great female work was possible because women were not being as gamed by modernity as they now are, so they could actually hone their skill decently. Now, women are encouraged to be incredibly stupid, anxious, etc. But men are too. It's just awful

>>24794513
>the autistic greentext point-by-point reply to an at-arms-length putdown
why are you lashing out eh?
just saying you didn’t remember dates or names - it shines a light on whether you’re interested in facts at all.

>>24794569
>why are you lashing out eh?
I'm making fun of you for being a fag who's carrying around arguments he's had on this website.
>just saying you didn’t remember dates or names
So? Do you expect everyone to be as dishonest as you obviously are and consult Wikipedia in order to gain your level of pseudery?
>it shines a light on whether you’re interested in facts
Not really but this conversation sure "shines a light" on the fact you're a disingenuous fag who lives online.

>>24794579
anyone who’s interested enough to question the authorship of a novel, i probably would expect to check, yeah.
i’m sure this won’t get far with someone as fighting-mad as you but this is my first time talking about frankenstein on this website. a lot of ad hominem for someone who recently cried appeal to authority fallacy.

>>24794589
>y-you didn't know a name and a date
And you looked it up on Wikipedia in order to feign intelligence.
>people who make fun of me are just mad
Awwww, did your mom tell you that to help you cope with the bullying? How long did it take them to realize you were never going to have a social life anyway so they might as well home school you? Lol.

>>24793017
>Yeah, men were destined for greatness or shame. Women were destined for mediocrity
Why are so many men just mediocre then?

>>24794631
take a mental step back and reread our interaction. would like to see an otherwise sensible person say it’s me who’s upset.
>You’re projecting an awful lot
> help you cope with the bullying? How long did it take them to realize you were never going to have a social life anyway so they might as well home school you?
you couldn’t write it.

>>24794538
>projecting
>This is probably why you've been friendzoned by every girl you've ever been attracted to

>>24794641
From only a few posts I was able to tell you're a retarded loser who lives his life online. The first clue was your admission that you carry around arguments you've had with random anons as if they're life events. The second clue was the obvious samefagging. The third clue was your pretense that we're writing research essays and not simply posting online. The fourth clue was your continued attempt to disingenuously shift from the subject of conversation to hold on to a gotcha that isn't actually a gotcha.

So yes, anon. In only a few short posts anyone can tell you're a retarded loser who lives his life online and that your primary source of self-esteem is imagining you're winning arguments with strangers who are actually laughing at you.

>>24792874 (OP)
Lady Murasaki's "Genji Monogatari" is considered a masterpiece.

>>24792906
I think so. It is criminally underrated. Undset is IMO the best Catholic author of the last century.

>>24794673
Kek, you're replying to multiple people, one of them me

>>24794673
this is my first reply
i did see that other anon accuse you of being some other anon. but you’re also playing that same card here, aren’t you?

>>24794686
Yeah, don't believe you and even if I'm wrong about the samefagging there's still the other points.
>>24794688
Yeah,still don't believe you. All indications point to you being the type of loser who would use his phone and a computer to pretend to be 2 different people.

>>24794695
did you stop to think that this would just make you look stupider to me if it wasn’t true?
either way my point was you’re guilty of the exact same charge you’re pushing

>>24794720
>did you stop to think that this would just make you look stupider to me if it wasn’t true
I figured you'd probably get hung up on it and I could make fun of you either way, lol. Also: other points. Doesn't really make a difference if I'm mocking 2 retards or just one.

Women are vapid whores

>>24794726
am i hung up? feel like i’ve been pulling punches.
& is it that fun if you don’t take into account the other persons angle though? i only thought you were a regular 4chan chud but now it looks more like i’m talking to a bona fide diagnosed autist.

>>24794735
>am i hung up?
Definitely. Like I said, I figured you'd get really hung up on being called a samefag. You turned a trivial conversation about Frankenstein into a weird pseudo-debate that only served to prove you're both an idiot and a loser.

>>24794743
can you point to where i did that exactly?

>>24794751
>exactly?
Lol, fag.

>>24794761
and that is that.

>>24794764
I already pointed out to you, anon. You're an idiot and you post like a fag. Simple as.

>>24794766
omg, both of you stfu

>>24794790
who tf is this guy now

Interesting thread ruined by two redditors trying to out retard each other.

>>24794886
very interesting thread. never been done before i’d say.

>>24794633
Because the tails are still smaller than the average??? Are you a woman?

>>24793047
She was a fairly masculine woman

>>24792893
they hated them because they spoke the truth

>>24794539
>>24794551
For me it has always been 5'3" and an attitude.

>>24792874 (OP)
booba

>>24793000
She was a nasty classist

>>24793094
This comment started very good with high quality insight but went off-rails so bad towards the end

>>24795414
I'm mesmerized. Only reason I haven't hidden the thread

>>24792874 (OP)
My personal favorite is when people bring up Frankenstein, as if it weren't entirely written by Percy who then let his wife take credit as a joke.

>>24794132
Knew it!

>>24796243
>This junk again.
May your sister Phoebe stab you in your sleep tonight.

I need to say something very important: English literature is garbage, and you should all be ashamed.

>>24796266
Any real scholar who looks into this matter knows Percy wrote the vast majority of the book. Mary probably wrote it down while he dictated to her and he thought it would be funny to say she "wrote it" because she technically did write it down lol. That Percy had a sense of humor.

>>24796374
Debunked meme. kys.

>>24796374
robinson compared mary’s 1816-17 manuscript drafts with the published 1818 text and it showed 3000 words of percy’s suggestions out of roughly 72000 words total.

>>24796420
It's not, ACK-tually.

>>24796436
>[Percy] contributed at least 4,000 to 5,000 words to this 72,000 word novel. Despite the number of Percy’s words, the novel was conceived and mainly written by Mary Shelley, as attested not only by others in their circle (e.g. Byron, Godwin, Claire and Charles Clairmont, Leigh Hunt) but by the nature of the manuscript evidence in the surviving pages of the Draft. (Robinson, 2008, p. 25)
>This so-called ‘handwriting argument’ assumes that everything in the manuscript written in Mary Shelley’s hand was originally composed by her.
>there exist manuscripts in Mary Shelley’s handwriting of works composed by Percy—for example, his 1820 lyrical drama Prometheus Unbound (Fraistat, 1991), and the poems The Mask of Anarchy, The Witch of Atlas, The Cenci, and The Sensitive Plant (Reiman and Powers, 1977, pp. 210, 236, 301, 348). Therefore, a possible theory is that the same arrangement was used in the composition of Frankenstein.

>>24796455
No. Do you even know what an editor is?

>>24796455
>[Percy] contributed 4,000 to 5,000 words to this 72,000 word novel. Despite the number of Percy’s words, the novel was conceived and mainly written by Mary Shelley, as attested not only by others in their circle (e.g. Byron, Godwin, Claire and Charles Clairmont, Leigh Hunt) but by the nature of the manuscript evidence in the surviving pages of the Draft.
Did you read this before sending?

>>24796471
Did you read past the first line that confirmed your bias?

THIS SO-CALLED ‘HANDWRITING ARGUMENT’ ASSUMES THAT EVERYTHING IN THE MANUSCRIPT WRITTEN IN MARY SHELLEY’S HAND WAS ORIGINALLY COMPOSED BY HER.

THERE EXIST MANUSCRIPTS IN MARY SHELLEY’S HANDWRITING OF WORKS COMPOSED BY PERCY—FOR EXAMPLE, HIS 1820 LYRICAL DRAMA PROMETHEUS UNBOUND (FRAISTAT, 1991), AND THE POEMS THE MASK OF ANARCHY, THE WITCH OF ATLAS, THE CENCI, AND THE SENSITIVE PLANT (REIMAN AND POWERS, 1977, PP. 210, 236, 301, 348). THEREFORE, A POSSIBLE THEORY IS THAT THE SAME ARRANGEMENT WAS USED IN THE COMPOSITION OF FRANKENSTEIN.

>>24796455
Hole status: gaped

>>24796476
Yes, I was just wondering because you sent something that directly & sensibly rebutted your initial post.

>>24796501
I included the argument for the sake of intellectual honesty. I'm not >>24796374, and it doesn't refute their claim.

>>24796507
If I were trying to argue the latter point, I wouldn’t have included the first quote. It makes it look pretty silly appearing after that.

>>24796513
I lied when I said I included it for intellectual honesty. I included it so retards would jump to conclusions and BTFO of themselves because they can't be bothered to read.

>>24796525
Reread your own post with a rational head and see if you’re more likely to go with the latter theory rather than the fact backed up by numbers and five other witnesses.
Which would stand up in a court of law?

>>24792874 (OP)
because they are porn addicts
this is known
readers and writers of literary pornography, this is the extent of their abilities and potential

>>24796536
No. Robinson's analysis is fundamentally flawed and invalid.

>>24796559
I guess that’s convenient for you.

>>24792874 (OP)
there is no biological reason for a woman to be a creator of something other than a child. She doesnt have to impress anyone or win public approval, all she has to do in life is part her legs for a right man, who does have to do all these things.

>>24796577
what even fucking makes u think this im so confused. what basis do u have for this idea?

>>24796568
It's far more inconvenient for "feminists" than it is convenient for me.

>>24796577
and that was how human civilization existed for 10k years. Now however we are all trying to be equal and soon to be dead.

>>24796602
"soon to be dead"

>>24796590
All of human history? lol women get degrees these days more than men but can’t think logically

>>24796621
"all of human history"
so u mean the human history that has many examples of women creating?
ur first reply said women could not be creators which has almost nothing to do with getting degrees which uve changed to here.
ur just ignoring proven facts to make ur point seem more correct
theres research that says most of the oldest cave paintings were made by women.
sappho is one of the most famous poets from ancient greece.
women historically created tapestries and woven art
jefimija was a serbian woman and orthodox nun who was a well known poet, needlewoman and engraver.
the renaissance and baroque eras featured many women creating art
most of the reason women didnt create in history is cause they werent allowed to?
if u can provide a reliable source that proves women werent creators i will apologise to u.

>>24796596
Hmm, how did the conversation end up here? Thought we were just talking straight literary criticism.

>>24796651
nta & it’s true women have created masterpieces, but it’s also true they have no real reason to - >>24793863

>>24796665
do men have no any reason to create masterpieces? does anyone have any real reason to create masterpieces honestly? we can survive on earth without art

>>24796661
You're mistaken.

>>24796651
The fact that you’re comparing cave paintings and sewing to Homer is laughable. Back to the kitchen.

>>24796672
were not talking abput masterpieces in this particular conversation (i know the thread about is about masterpieces) the original anon just said women shouldnt be creators not once did i mention masterpieces retard

>>24796675
I wouldn’t call decorating the cave that the man created to be creating the cave

>>24796688
wtf r u on about men didnt create caves lmaooooo they used pre-exisiting caves

>>24796670
Ostensibly.

>>24792977
this lady is a brainlet and you're even more of a brainlet for listening to her.

>>24796696
Indubitably.

hey has anyone in this thread read a book before?

>>24796700
i studied frankenstein for decades.

>>24796710
Studying frankenstein for five minutes would be a waste of time.

Tell us about the level of profound mental retardation that is required to study it for decades. This seems interesting.

>>24796692
holes decorated pre existing caves for their kids, because the purpose of a hole is to squeeze out another man to lead the tribe

>>24796710
No you didn't.

>>24796713
>>24796720
it was a joke fellas

>>24792874 (OP)
Not gonna read the thread
Who won us or femoids?!

>>24792893
>go play Anime Titty Games 4
I want to play Anime Titty Games 4

>>24797068
not us

>>24792977
>>It's a fact that women read much more than men
>Women read mostly porn; they're porn addicts.
A lot of women read woke performative shit too.

>>24797073
Are you trying to deceive me?
Femoids often do this

>>24797084
take it how you will mufucker

I read Tess of the d'Urbervilles like 6 years ago and i was under the impression it was the work of a woman
I wonder if any other anons have similar experiences regarding novels written by men

>>24797101
you thought thomas hardy was a woman’s name? or you just read the whole thing without looking at the cover?

Another men vs women thread holy fuck is the average age here 12?

Am I the only one who finds non-AI greta hot? I even bought her book from the bargain bin to look at the pictures.

>>24797118
Quiet, hole.

>>24797103
I was aware he's a man since I've read 2 novels by him prior to Tess
It just felt different "woman-like"

>>24797129
>everyone who disagrees with me is a woman
you infantile imbecile. These threads, while funny and true are just circlejerking. Using retarded arguments like "muh women read more" or " men have higher iq" is waste of our time. Instead people should choose 3 best female authors and 3 best male authors according to them and go full on literary analysis why men are superior and better. That way no women could ever dare to respond.

>>24797151
all the greatest works of ancient literature were by a woman — calliope.

>>24797151
>validate holes
Quiet, hole.

>>24797161
chud on chud violence

>>24792874 (OP)
I think it's wrong to compare them with men
It sounds quite demeaning to be honest
We can't have the same expectations for them since they're not men in the first place unless you believe in muh equality theory

>>24792874 (OP)
>>24792893
>>24792930
>>24792977
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffvRhsViyIQ

>>24792874 (OP)
Emma is a masterpiece

>>24792874 (OP)
Frankenstein. Regardless of the fact that there have been, society would fucking stop women from getting ahead, even today. I don’t know if this post is genuine or trolling but it’s content is simply asinine

>>24792934
Most books are forgotten. Same for women? What’s the mystery? Did you think all books written in 1862 by men live on as classics? Are you retarded?

>>24792918
A Black Qween, to be precise.

>>24797126
Yes? She has extreme sperg physiognomy. Why, if you gave me a pair of calipers...

>>24792874 (OP)
>It has seemed to me a possible myth or parable, that in the beginning, when men became men by some miraculous act of God, a soul was bestowed only on them.

>>24792893
And the fact that women consider Jane Austen high literature is why no woman has written a literary masterpiece. They all prefer self insert romance and smut.

>>24792874 (OP)
Nigger you talk like you wrote Paradise lost lmao most women authors are better than you at writing you silly nigger

>>24796455
Checked. Percy wrote it.

>>24792874 (OP)
Remember that story from DFW?
>Two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”

Men born into the patriarchy cannot tell they are living in such a system any more than fish can tell you what water is. Their every thought is colored by the false valor of toxic masculinity. Women don't need to write a masterpiece because every time two women speak to each other (about something other then men) they are creating Art.

>>24792874 (OP)
Dickinson is the greatest American Poet.

>>24799081
Retard.

>>24799081
>every time two women speak to each other they are creating Art
Cancel women's rights. This shit is too stupid to continue.

>>24799081
What if I think living in a patriarchy is a good thing?

>>24797151
Clive Barker
John Williams
Nathaniel Hawthorne

Vs

Flannery O’Connor
Charlotte Bronte
Virginia Woolfe

Men win 3-0

>>24799081
Well I guess you don't think Virginia Woolf is much of an artist, if the quote of hers you found worthy of putting as picrel is just her seething about men.

>>24792874 (OP)
Dang Leo got to suck THOSE PANCAKES?!

>>24799081
>Their every thought is colored by the false valor of toxic masculinity

So does that mean the story you just used from David Foster Wallace (a thought from a man) is also colored by the false valor of toxic masculinity? Therefore rendering your entire post fallacious?

>>24799342
DFW killed herself due to debilitating gender dysphoria

>>24799302
>Clive Barker
0/10 bait.

>>24793001
This is the same Woolf that seethed so much about Ulysses she vanished for a few years only to release a pale and boring version in Mrs Dalloway? Woolf was a great writer but she doesn't hold up to Joyce and she was an annoying spastic to top it off.

>>24792874 (OP)
Woolf, Charlotte and Emily Bronte, Shirley Jackson and George Elliot have a body of work that contains nothing but masterpieces.

>>24792893
>there are more women who have read My Secret Were-rapist Billionaire than men.

>>24799081
This is the kind of post I would craft if I wanted to increase the hatred of women

>>24792874 (OP)
obvious b8 thread
>compare Middlemarch to Paradise Lost as if they are even in the same ballpark.
middlemarch is literally one of the best books ever written. to suggest otherwise is ignorance

>>24799625
Having just read Agnes Grey (and listened to the audiobook of The Tenant of Wildfell Hall), I personally would add Anne Brontë as well.

>>24792893
Why are you trying to diminish the rich and multifaceted storytelling techniques of Anime Titty Game 4?

>>24799781
To have ever known a Dorothea Brooke — It might even have turned me from my agnostic ways!

>>24799081
Lmao, Woolf (deservedly) BTFO
Always bizarre to me how some anons, on the /lit/ board no less, will always fail to see obvious ironic tone.

>>24799625
>Woolf
>a body of work that contains nothing but masterpieces

She created this one.

>>24799081
I don't believe men are born into a patriarchy though, I believe they are born into a gynocracy and persist on chinese whispers of a bygone age of tough pricks.

>>24792874 (OP)
I don't think any woman writer besides maybe Emily Dickinson, shall ever know what it's like to be a male outcast.
That's what a lot of these writers are, or the Hemingway variety, where you're not so much an outcast as a possessed man.
A lot of these men have no reason to lie or cheat or beg. Women tend to dislike JD Salinger because he said that he thought that there was no significant third place in those towns, and that's what women spend their time pretending.
"Oh that's a gentrified cafe, that's a life."
"Oh that's a hairdressers, that's a life, a clothes shop, a whatever. Whereas a man outcasted just finds nothing of value to write about there and focuses on either writing a classic or a book about trains. This post was a waste of time, I don't think I have changed any mind.

>>24799045
I'm not so sure now. I read a stylmetric analysis meant to refute claims of dubious authorship and it inadvertantly made a good case for her father being the author. There were different methods and metrics used, and Godwin was always the runner up for authorship, with the exception of one method, where his writing was a closer match than Shelley's. The closest work to Shelley's of those analyzed was her next novel, a novel which Godwin had rewritten for her, and that wasn't the only time that happened. It's not definitive, but combined with the fact that none of her other works approach the depth or themes of Frankenstein and that she frequently had "help" from Percy, Godwin and others around her, it seems like the best claim of her authorship is that she put her name on it.

>>24792874 (OP)
*Suggests Joyce wrote a masterpiece.*

kill niggers

>>24792980
>A woman can be good at something, but she will never reach the ranks of a 0.1% male at the top of his craft.
This is false. Women who are mentally ill or neurodivergent in some way can reach these ranks as they already do not fit in, and so are not burdened by gendered socialization. Neurodivergence is also associated with extra sensitivity, creativity, greater "intensities", etc. (though not necessarily the other way around).There is generally only one path of "typical" development, but a multitude of paths to diverge from the norm (this is why the norm is called the norm).
For example, Sylvia Path and Virginia Woolf (type 1 bipolar disorder with high manic features is associated with higher creativity and verbal intelligence.) are exceptional because of this. Sylvia Path had a recorded IQ of 160.

>>24800777
*Sylvia Plath - I never read her

>>24800777
Notice how a lot of these types of women successfully kill themselves, which is abnormal for women in general.

>>24800777
>Sylvia Path had a recorded IQ of 160

That is top 0.1% of IQ, so I suppose that is a rare exception in that domain.

I don't know if she'd qualify for top 0.1% of exemplary writers though, especially considering she published only one book in her lifetime.

>>24800792
exceptional woman = masculine temperament

>>24792874 (OP)
Generally speaking, women are just not as creative. No woman has ever made good music, for example.

There are evolutionary and environmental explanations for women being mediocre and unoriginal.

>>24800817
so when men write great poetry about tenderness or emotional pain
(like keats or rilke) that must make them feminine

>>24792874 (OP)
now i’m no “feminista”, but what counts as a “masterpiece” is coded by male institutions, isn’t it? critics, publishers, museums. if the gatekeepers are all men, the canon reflects them. just my 2c.

>>24792874 (OP)
The fountainhead exists.

>>24800945
>let more women in to let more women in, not on merit
That mistake has been made before and it's always devastating. Write something good.

>>24800913
The first words of Western literature are literally a man begging a woman (divine or not) to sing through him. The Iliad starts off

Sing to me, O Goddess,

The act of poetic creation is feminine at its source.

>>24800945
to some extent yeah, it takes time to become a classic and although universities now are very progressive this hasnt been the case for that long. i think one hundred years of solitude is somewhat of a modern classic, and oryx & crake is more contemporary but very good

>>24801033
>man write about woman, therefore woman is source of all writing

>>24801025
if the people deciding what counts as merit have historically been men, isn’t it reasonable to assume the whole things fairly skewed?

>>24801046
incredible someone who wants to weigh in on the art of poetry can miss the nuance of what i said.
in epic poetry, the poet doesn’t decide to write; he invokes a goddess - the muse - to speak through him.

When's the last time anyone has written a "masterpiece?" Most fundamental concepts have already been written, and because those writers were the first to do it, their works are considered "good."

Conveniently for your argument, during almost all times of opportunity for literary innovation, it was almost impossible for women to become published.

when I took AP English in high school we read Joyce, Sartre, Camus, Shakespeare and some other modern novels. They I took another semester of English lit in uni and we read stuff like Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic and Persepolis. It's like if the course were titled "The Ordinary and Mundane Lives of the Oppressed and Marginalized".

WTF happened

>>24801049
No. Men are rational decision makers capable of objectivity. Women are emotional makers incapable of objectivity. Women are objectively not good writers. You're suggesting letting them in just because they're women, which is exactly what women would continue to do, lowering standards to accomplish as much, until it's nothing but women and merit no longer exists.

>>24801049
No, because you trust institutions everyday that have always been historically male dominated, and had males decide what has merit.

Physics, mathematics, history, geography, epistemology, engineering...I don't really feel I need to continue.

>>24801092
DFW wrote a review about joseph frank's dostoevsky biography in which he discusses his complaint that modern authors sort of lack the ambition of people like dosteovsky and are caught up in describing subjective experiences and social commentary. it's quite interesting

>>24801104
Educate yourself chud.

>>24801107
>Men are rational decision makers capable of objectivity. Women are emotional makers incapable of objectivity
you’d expect the latter to be more artistic wouldn’t you?

>>24801104
>WTF happened
The manufactured decline of western civilization has accelerated.

>>24801123
Good, you deserve it for colonialism. Repent.

>>24801121
And you would be wrong. Today nobody is stopping women from making amazing art, they just don't, not for lack of trying, but because they by and large can't.

>>24801127
When you give up everything you gained from colonialism then your criticisms of it will be valid and not before.

>>24801137
one of my favourite (top 3) authors of the last century was a woman, but either way, isn’t this arguing in bad faith considering centuries of exclusion? there are still institutions. all that said i still don’t really care.

>>24801155
No, it's not. You are arguing in bad faith to justify including women because they're women.

>>24801159
i literately beat the fuck out of women on a daily basis. just having a level-headed conversation with you.

>>24801165
literally

>>24800707
I hate to beak it to you but none of the victims in this book is actually a nigger.

>>24801033
>a man calls on a fictitious, symbolic woman made up by men
>this reflects the actual talents of real women
Are you actually retarded? Woman moment

>>24801344
>To
>Through
Actually retarded, bitch can't even read basic prepositions.

>>24800563
>stylmetric analysis
That stuff is bullshit. There's a mountain of circumstantial evidence indicating Percy alongside the fact 5000 words were irrefutably written by him. He guided the novel from conception to completion and people saying otherwise are tards quoting others as if they came to the conclusion all on their own.

>>24801344
Even within male-created traditions, the idea of inspiration and creativity was personified as feminine - suggesting that, on some level, the culture knew or imagined the creative principle as feminine.

>>24801356
lol

>>24801356
>bitch

That's really misogynistic, don't say that. All of the great female minds of western canon, dead and alive, are scowling at you right now. All seven of them.

>>24801529
You might say their holes are gaping.

>>24801472
I don't know how to break this to you, but men being motivated to do great and terrible things for pussy (which is what a muse ultimately boils down to) doesn't mean anything for women's actual capabilities

>>24792874 (OP)
Majority of men don’t read or write, they are too busy playing multiplayer video games and discord. Middlemarch and Austen’s novels absolutely mogs 99% of literary “classics”, dumb-dumb. Paradise lost? Lol.

>>24801874
You will never be a woman.

What else can be said? Hoes mad.

>>24801874
Middlemarch sucks

>>24801338
don't wake me up from the dream

>>24792946
>poetry
men sound gay as fuck lol
what if (You) rendered into iambic pentameter a poem about a billionaire werewolf pirate who kept an average looking personalityless woman as a sex slave and even though he could have any women he chose her and he violently raped her but in reality it's about the timeless struggle of good vs evil?

>>24793094
should we send women to extermination camp to improve the general literary output?

>>24801853
In epic poetry, the poet didn’t decide to write, he asked to be spoken through. If you can’t properly understand the muse you really have no business talking about art in the first place. You’re less likely to get it than you claim women are.
& writing something down to sex isn’t the same as writing it off altogether. Sex is the central rhythm of life. True art centres on the celebration of human sexuality.

Wuthering heights.

>>24802745
>through
Dumb holeposting. Learn how to read.