Thread 24793309

Why is the Western canon so homoerotic? Is there a relationship between making good art and being able to appreciate the beauty of the male form?

>>24793309 (OP)
Name one homosexual book in the canon I’ll wait

>>24793312
moby dick

>>24793312
>>24793317

Because, like homosexuality, literature is ultimately rooted in sin.
The man who reads or writes is first and foremost an idolater. He praises the dead, the material, holds it above all else. He who spends most of his time chained to the inner voices, nay, the imaginations and memories of men cannot help but nurse those same desires which lead him to sodomy. When he enters the novel, it is his entry into the other man's anus.
Bloom knew this well. Yes, he had a wife. She was his beard. He lived in a time when they were more necessary. It is never more clear that he devoted himself to sin when he admitted to worshiping letters, literature. This is why his one novel is a clumsy fan's copy of the Voyage to Arctutus. He was a member of the occult, and they have no qualms in offering their rears for worldly gain. Bloom simply happened to enjoy it.

>>24793323
Read the footnote

>>24793312
Shakespeare’s sonnets, Montaigne’s essays, Plato’s dialogues, though I guess bisexual would be more accurate.

>>24793309 (OP)
It’s not. You’re just a mentally ill coom brained degenerate that cannot understand the concept of men deeply caring about eachother without it being romantic or sexual.

>>24793312
The poems of Ibycus, Anacreon, Simonides, Pindar
Sappho, fragments
Theognis, Elegies
Plato, Lysis
Plato, Symposium
Plato, Phaedrus
Theocritus, Idylls
Catullus, Poems
Virgil, Second Eclogue
Horace, Odes
Martial, Epigrams
Petronius, Satyricon
Christopher Marlowe, Edward II
Shakespeare, Sonnets
Michelangelo, Sonnets
Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass
The poems of Rimbaud and Verlaine
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
Thomas Mann, Death in Venice
Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time
The list goes on

>>24793560
Goethe, West-östlicher divan

>>24793309 (OP)
Homosexuals are the natural aristocrats of the species

>>24793627
t. Richard “Greg Johnson’s boytoy” Spencer

>>24793630
Did he also say this?

>>24793323
i-is this real?

Art in general tends to be more homoerotic, hell I would even claim literature is one of the few fields woman can rival man in! But for all the authors in the canon a minority of them were fags and a lot of them were bisexual, you can find as many gigafags in the canon as you can find pedophiles or non-whites to be honest, they really are a minority and most of them (from personal experience) are meat puppets who are dead inside and lack free will. Only a minority of fags are really aristocratic and smarr and way above averwgr and they tend to be the top of the pyramid within the fag hierarchy be it desirewise or partnerwise

>>24793309 (OP)
The ideal man is not a woman, his body and soul are forged for action, shaping his environment, power.
Cultures who value individuality, competence and practical power will romanticize the male form. It's all rooted in eros but it's not close to all about actual sexual gratification as in gay shit.

>The gays, good heavens. A full 35 or 40 percent of major Western authors from the beginning to the present day might have been gay. Would be very safe to assume.
Harold Bloom

>>24793560
Sappho was Lesbian, which doesn't count as being gay. If anything it makes it less gay to read her.

>As it is confessedly the beauty of man which is to be conceived under one general idea, so I have noticed that those who are observant of beauty only in women, and are moved little or not at all by the beauty of men, seldom have an impartial, vital, inborn instinct for beauty in art.
Johann Joachim Winckelmann

pornsickness. pornsick zombies only see lust

>>24794733
>It was only Christianity, with resentment against life in its foundations, which made sexuality something impure: it threw filth on the beginning, on the prerequisite of our life.
Nietzsche

>>24793323
>I can't do this. It's too fucking gay
Lmaoo who made these footnotes??!?! Is this photoshop?

>>24793309 (OP)
Perhaps. It would also explain why the late Baroque was the highest peak of music: wigs, tights, heels, etc. Even if not all composers were gay, their music certainly was, in both the new and old senses of the word. It was sensual and whimsical, yet also structurally, technically, and aesthetically complex. The perfect fusion of pleasure and intellect.

>be flaming homo back in the day
>ordinary people hate you
>the church and state both hate you
>your future doesn't involve children but you want to contribute to the world in some comparably deep and lasting way
>discover the world of art
>realize you can be celebrated for centuries if you're good, and your outsider perspective is an advantage for once
It sure beats the alternative of "die in a war protecting people who won't miss you", eh?

>>24793309 (OP)
The Bible is ??? :o

>>24795101
2 Samuel 1:26
I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.

>>24795088
Not much has changed. Also, notice how the best black men in terms of character are gay men? When was the last time a black sissy robbed or killed someone in comparison to straightoids?

>>24793343
>The man who reads or writes is first and foremost an idolater. He praises the dead, the material, holds it above all else
Yes

>>24793309 (OP)
Semites, aka Jews and Muslims had to make sure that Europeans were not gay, it worked for 1500 years or so but it seems that Whites just love to promote homosexuality and transgenderism and materialism

>>24793309 (OP)
What are you gonna do in 10 years when you can no longer tell the difference between a classic work of literature and a curated set of AI outputs? Maybe people will start shrugging off their hyperfixation on the gayness of authors once authors start becoming less and less human.
The main purpose of the western canon these days is as fodder for youtube video essays and as props for people to performatively skim through in order to try to make themselves be perceived as "smart" or "cultured". Can't see why an AI can't do that better. If anything, a machine could crank out the smartest-sounding, highest-cultured, queerest dark-academia-coded work that ever hit the world of literature.
All that "reading" shit is just window dressing, it's all about social performance. If the AI stuff upsets you, I'm sure the industry will push even further into becoming indiscernable from human writing so that a human "author" can slap his name on the book to placate you. And maybe he'll be gay, and the audience will hyperfixate on that instead of the book, and we'll be right back to where we started.

>>24795088
>It sure beats the alternative of "die in a war protecting people who won't miss you", eh?
Eh, some men died with love on their lips, their thankless sacrifice etched into history. Others died sad and ostracized only for their book to take off once the world found the proper narrative to use to appreciate it. Who knows who came out ahead?

>>24793317
Also Billy Budd.

Everything is homoerotic if you goon hard enough

>>24793309 (OP)
There's definitely a link between making good art and being able to appreciate the beauty of human expression, if that's what you mean. Homosexual people were able to push past their fetish and make works of art that became universally cherished and appreciated because, at least in the past, they had the wherewithal and self-control to do so.
Can a world of gooners and gay-gooners pushed into spineless degeneracy by corporations do the same? Probably not.

>>24795468
>t. seething midwit foid

>>24795688
what's with board tourists spamming this guy all of a sudden?

>>24794742
>Freddy Knee-chee
Pornsick zombie.

>>24795794
I've heard that Bloom was a meme back in the day