Has reading gotten in the way of your personal relationships?

[Pollopicu]

-Do you prefer reading than going out and meeting new people?

-Has reading (material or frequency) affected your romantic relationships? if so how?

-Do friends and strangers judge you by your choice in literature? have you lost any friends for this reason?

On a score from 1-10 (one being the least and 10 being the most) how much do you think reading affects your personal life in terms of meeting new people and closeness to your partner. Do you use reading as a buffer in your relationship?

[Desolation]

I would much rather read than go out and meet new people. But, to be fair, I hate people as much as I love reading, so you can't really blame the books for that.

As far as relationships go, the more I read, the more my mind expanded, the more I thought, and eventually all of that made me realize how little I enjoyed my last relationship. I could see parallels to it in books that I read, and more and more love seemed like an empty emotion to me. Her cheating on me with 3 different men in one week, didn't help either.

I've never lost a friend because of my love of books.

Despite everything, I'd say that reading is about a 5 in terms of influence on my personal life. It has an influence, but other factors have an equal or greater influence.

[Buh4Bee]

My husband is a workaholic so I have a lot of time to read. When he is hanging around looking for me to entertain him and I am planning to read, I have to tell him to go away. He likes it when I read to him, but I can't get him into a mutual routine. I love to read out loud, especially to someone who loves to listen as much as I like to read. My husband like to listen, but get s distracted after 15 minutes.

All my friends read, because we end up talking about books. I am not reading as much as I would like! Great thread. Thanks.

[dfloyd]

or romantic relationship with a non-reader. I am twice divorced, and now I realize that readers and non-readers can never have a lasting relationship. I like to go out and meet new people, but I often stay at home, and I never get lonely. Now that I'm older, I can size people up quickly. If they have nothing to offer, I don't even start a relationship. Reading is a great part of my life, and I would give books a rating of 10 in my personal life. Books will never disappoint you, and they provide the best means of personal growth. Books and reading are not necessarilly better than some people, but I have never met a person who could fill my life as well as reading and learning.

[Pollopicu]

Desolation, I'm a misanthrope to the core. I can easily get into a long discussion on why I hate people but I'll save it..And I'm not just saying that either. I hate people and society so much that I need psychological help. Then again, why should (I) be the one to get help when it's society that's effe'd up. I feel like I live in a mad hatters tea party.

...but getting back to the subject at hand..that's why I read as much as I do. I rather have a good book (or a mediocre book for that matter) than meet people who disgust me anyway.
I think if the world were full of people more like-mind to myself, maybe, I might prefer their company, but because I feel that most people are trash, and the rest who are not are hiding from it, it's hard to want to get out and do more.

jersea, I read to my husband too. We both enjoy it as well. Not so much after I read the entire unabridged version of "The Count of Monte Cristo". We're still recovering from that. Took me 6 months.


great post Dfloyd, thank you.

"If they have nothing to offer, I don't even start a relationship." that is my new philosophy now. As one of my internet friends put it.."If someone isn't enriching my life they just aren't worth my time."


Books right now rate about 7-8 in my life.

[Dark Muse]

Greetings fellow misanthropes. I too share your sentiments. I have no inclination to socolizing, and I hate the human race and human soceity, so yes, I would prefer to read over meeting new people. And I spend most my time as a recluse doing just that.

As for relationships, I don't think my reading would intefer, right now I am in a long distance relationship so it is not really easy to judge, but he knows how I feel about reading, and he himself enjoys reading, and has his other personal projects he likes to do, so I think that reading can be worked into our relationship without disupting it.

I would say that really reading was very little affect on my personal life, if I had to give it a number I would say maybe a 3, since even if I was not reading, I still would not be inclined to meet new people.

[JBI]

Maybe a few years ago, since I finished high school early and then essentially was packing in 500+ pages a day, and doing little else besides working. AS for now, well, I hardly read anymore, besides some poetry - last year I managed to down a surprising amount, but this year I barely have enough time to stay on my feet, so my reading, for the most part, has been restricted to coursework and what is in my languages textbooks - notably some meh easy lyrics by Jacques Prévert - though, I am still trying to supplement a little culture into all the languages I study, notably Chinese, Italian and French - the Chinese being more difficult, since classical Chinese is very different from contemporary Chinese - but as it is, besides a few poetry books that I still have time to read, I get nothing.


Though, I'm going to a big book sale tomorrow (it started today, so hopefully they have something left!) so I may be able to get some good stuff to read, but even so, personal relationships still reign on top.

Literature is made far more enjoyable when it isn't personal - that's something people tend to forget, since people I guess mostly read novels. Shakespeare is made far more enjoyable when read with somebody else who enjoys his work.

[Pollopicu]

Literature is made far more enjoyable when it isn't personal - that's something people tend to forget, since people I guess mostly read novels. Shakespeare is made far more enjoyable when read with somebody else who enjoys his work.

I don't know Shakespeare yet, but I aspire to someday enjoy it. I think it would be very nice to be able to enjoy a work of that magnitude with someone else. I use to have a Japanese friend (Youmi) and we use to pour through illustrated Art books and prints guessing the artists. That was such a blast. I miss her so much. She was the only one I could've done something like that with.

[mal4mac]

I don't know Shakespeare yet, but I aspire to someday enjoy it. I think it would be very nice to be able to enjoy a work of that magnitude with someone else. I use to have a Japanese friend (Youmi) and we use to pour through illustrated Art books and prints guessing the artists. That was such a blast. I miss her so much. She was the only one I could've done something like that with.

Why "someday"? Why not now?

You'll find a lot of people who like Shakespeare on this forum. Try the RSC Complete Shakespeare. I'm reading through this at the moment and I think it would be great for a beginner to Shakespeare (or anyone!)

I've just finished re-reading Twelfth Night, which is a good play to start with. It's Shakespeare's funniest comedy. A "mad hatter's tea party" indeed! Some of his most beautiful verses as well.

http://www.rsc.org.uk/content/5124.aspx

You might like to check out the Japanese file director Kurosawa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ran_(film)

[Jozanny]

I attempted, unsuccessfully, to use my literary education to stop myself from getting involved with my ex. It never helped me with the men I actually desired either.

[Psycheinaboat]

I worry sometimes that reading has made me a snob. Not that I feel superior to anyone, but it is a stigma that some people attempt to lay on anyone who seems too scholarly or bibliophilic.

[Mariamosis]

Reading has diversified my views on society and has taught me to see situations in various perspectives and from multifaceted viewpoints.

Reading hasn't negatively affected my relationships with people, in fact it acts as a stimulant. I read but it is not something that comes to the forefront in any relationship. When I meet new people I am not thinking whether they will accept my books or will judge me because I like to read. People couldn't care less if you read unless of course they read, but no fellow reader has ever pointed out the flaws of my reading criteria.

My fiance and I have always been fairly private, yet, far from being hermits. He is a musician, therefore, when I read he then has time to work on music and vice versa. Consequently we have a very balanced pastime.

[Veva]

The way literature gets into my love-life reflects on dating.... I like to talk about novels with other people. And that is the thing, most guys I meet just have no idea who guys like Nick Hornby or Chuck Palahniuk (my favourite ) are. And I might sound childish, but I find that even more off-putting than spitting in public.... :rage:

[Pollopicu]

Why "someday"? Why not now?

You'll find a lot of people who like Shakespeare on this forum. Try the RSC Complete Shakespeare. I'm reading through this at the moment and I think it would be great for a beginner to Shakespeare (or anyone!)

I've just finished re-reading Twelfth Night, which is a good play to start with. It's Shakespeare's funniest comedy. A "mad hatter's tea party" indeed! Some of his most beautiful verses as well.

http://www.rsc.org.uk/content/5124.aspx

You might like to check out the Japanese file director Kurosawa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ran_(film)

I've always been intimidated by the works of Shakespeare, and I'd like to have a lot more literature under my belt before undertaking such a task.

Why is that particular edition good for beginners?
What edition would be the best and easiest to read for someone who's never studied or read Shakespeare in their life?

[LitNetIsGreat]

Do you prefer reading than going out and meeting new people?

Most of the time yes. I like going out, say once a week, but I am very picky about where I go and who I go with. Mostly I go out with close friends or family and that is fine, it is really enjoyable and I could be out all night with no problems. I hate it when I am out some place I would rather not be though, with people I have little in common with. After half-an-hour I wish I was at home on the sofa reading or whatever.

I once went to a party, hated it, and left for home after just 10 minutes. :banana:

Tonight though, I am off to the theatre with my brother which will be cool.



Has reading (material or frequency) affected your romantic relationships? if so how?

Not really. I was married at 21 (sorry girls) so it hasn't affected anything in that regards. Mrs Neely is quite relaxed, I have all the freedom I want in order to devote myself to whatever I choose.


Do friends and strangers judge you by your choice in literature? have you lost any friends for this reason?

I don't care in the slightest what strangers think of me and any friends would hardly be real friends if I lost them to the nature of the books I read.

I sometimes try to educate my friends and family regarding literature, but in reality my attempts aren't that successful. That might sound conceited but, for instance, my dad and brother thought I was reading porn when I turned up to the pub one day reading Milton! I had to tell them that the naked women on the cover was actually Eve and it wasn't porn. I explained a little bit about Milton and I had their interest for about 5 minutes, but then their eyes start to glaze and they looked at me funny, so I changed the subject. Things like that. It is fair to say that I don't come from a very literary family.


On a score from 1-10 (one being the least and 10 being the most) how much do you think reading affects your personal life in terms of meeting new people and closeness to your partner. Do you use reading as a buffer in your relationship?

I can't really give it a score, it doesn't affect me meeting new people because I'm not interested in meeting other people in a romantic sense. Actually with going to uni part-time reading has brought me into contact with other readers in itself.

I'm not an introvert or an extrovert, (though I do probably lean more towards introvertion) there is a balance for me where books and people can mix. I think actually the key word is balance in most things.

Edit:


I've always been intimidated by the works of Shakespeare, and I'd like to have a lot more literature under my belt before undertaking such a task.

Why is that particular edition good for beginners?
What edition would be the best and easiest to read for someone who's never studied or read Shakespeare in their life?

It has a lot of notes on each page explaining some of the more obscure words or phrases, and yes I would recommend it too. Don't be intimidated by Shakespeare, ever.__________________

[grotto]

Yes it has! Unfortunately, in the public world, it is I who has suffered for my interest, not them. While I have gained knowledge, a broader view and the ability to hold an intelligent conversation, those who I’m surrounded by are now so damn boring that I would rather be alone. The more you know, the more you experience, the higher above the drones you rise, the only problem is, there are fewer people who rise with you on your journey.

I read in public all the time, grab a book and go to restaurants, café’s or the coffee shop, eat, watch people and read and in the last two years of doing this, only one person has asked me what I was reading (I was reading the Idiot) only to get the reply, Really? Never heard of him? I love the chicken soup for the soul books, you should try them! Aughh! Shoot me now!

[papayahed]

No. Reading, for me, is a hobby. I'm a social being, If given the chance I would rather have the experience then read about it. I'm not saying there hasn't been occasions where I opted to stay at home and read a really good book rather then attend some event but the book has to be really good and the event really lame.

[kelby_lake]

I don't read the same stuff as my friends and so it's hard to talk sometimes because they don't understand.

[Pollopicu]

Yes it has! Unfortunately, in the public world, it is I who has suffered for my interest, not them. While I have gained knowledge, a broader view and the ability to hold an intelligent conversation, those who I’m surrounded by are now so damn boring that I would rather be alone. The more you know, the more you experience, the higher above the drones you rise, the only problem is, there are fewer people who rise with you on your journey.

I read in public all the time, grab a book and go to restaurants, café’s or the coffee shop, eat, watch people and read and in the last two years of doing this, only one person has asked me what I was reading (I was reading the Idiot) only to get the reply, Really? Never heard of him? I love the chicken soup for the soul books, you should try them! Aughh! Shoot me now!

I couldn't have said it all better myself.
Just recently I got together with an acquaintance and it seems to me when you mention to people you're reading something on the higher level of literature, they automatically seem to dismiss you. Not sure in what way, but there's definitely some dismissing going on. I can't seem to put my finger on it.


I recently purchased "The Idiot", and I can't wait to get to it.

[mal4mac]

I've always been intimidated by the works of Shakespeare, and I'd like to have a lot more literature under my belt before undertaking such a task.

Why is that particular edition good for beginners?
What edition would be the best and easiest to read for someone who's never studied or read Shakespeare in their life?

I don't think getting more literature under your belt will help much. Best just to dive in... This edition has very good notes and introductory essays, but not too many!

I'd start with Twelfth Night. It has some of Shakespeare's most beautiful verses ("If music be the food of love..."), is probably his funniest comedy, and it's not very demanding.

For a literate beginner like yourself I would think RSC Shakespeare would be a good starting place. You need to read a few pages to see if it works for you.

Another good play to start with is a "Midsummer's night dream", which RSC have released as a separate play, sample here:

http://www.rscshakespeare.co.uk/assets/i/A%20Midsummer%20Night%27s%20Dream%20SAMPLE.pdf

Read through this sample, especially the text and notes from p.20 onwards. Get it? If not - there are other versions out that provide more help without being overly scholarly - Oxford School Shakespeare for instance.

Hmmm... I'm turning into a Jehovah's Witness for Shakespeare :D

[Jozanny]

Yes it has! Unfortunately, in the public world, it is I who has suffered for my interest, not them. While I have gained knowledge, a broader view and the ability to hold an intelligent conversation, those who I’m surrounded by are now so damn boring that I would rather be alone. The more you know, the more you experience, the higher above the drones you rise, the only problem is, there are fewer people who rise with you on your journey.

This is why I miss the university clique I once had, despite my realization that relationships are rarely static, and are subject to change. At 46, I have no one to talk to about my interests. My ex means well, but all he wants from me is to pretend he is still virile and attractive to women. If he had not become disabled, ironically, I would have never even looked at him, and I keep trying not to be angry for not being strong enough not to cut him off again.

Communities like this are not a real substitute for shared interests of a social group, and I no longer have them, not really, except that I used to converse with other writers and editors by mail, and I rarely have the time for that these days. I don't have co-workers. I no longer have the shared experience of course work, and again, to really engage in this forum, I need to read and have some facts by which to debate with, and that too, takes time. Most of my posts usually wing it here, which can be frustrating, depending on how much I care about a given topic. But even my neighbors are either pretentious Baptists who brand me with interesting labels, or they complain because my condition is a nuisance. If I started to talk about Sartre and the difficulty of having an answer for existentialism, they would probably accuse me of something else.

[Niamh]

-Do you prefer reading than going out and meeting new people?
There is a time and a place for everything. Sometimes, depending on the situation i'd rather stay in and read than go out... but reading has lead me to meet more new people that going out has! :D


-Has reading (material or frequency) affected your romantic relationships? if so how?
It doesnt affect it one bit. In fact, thanks to my love of reading, i'm now in a new relationship. :)


-Do friends and strangers judge you by your choice in literature? have you lost any friends for this reason?
You will always find elitists who will snub because of your taste in reading. I read a broad spectrum of books, and if someone judged me because of some of the books i read, well, then they are not true friends are they!


On a score from 1-10 (one being the least and 10 being the most) how much do you think reading affects your personal life in terms of meeting new people and closeness to your partner. Do you use reading as a buffer in your relationship?
3 or 4 out of 10.

[Annamariah]

I'm not lonely because I read so much, I read so much because I'm lonely. Of course I wouldn't abandon books even if I had some kind of a social life, but loneliness has always been one of the most important reasons why I've read so much.

In elementary school I was always that lonely kid sitting alone on some corner of the schoolyard with a book, trying to turn the pages with mittens on her hands, waiting to get back to class. Later we didn't have to go out between the classes anymore, so I sat on the floor on the corridor reading. At least I always had the books to keep me company when no one else would talk to me :p

But yeah, if someone invited me somewhere, I wouldn't say "no" just because I'd prefer the company of a book :D

[Boo Radley]

I understand some of the yearnings I see written here. I feel your estrangement. Feed your soul with music, art and especially literature but don't be surprised if it doesn't bring you happiness. Wisdom and enlightenmet seldom bring peace of mind. Here at this website (as impersonal as this may be) you can see you are among like minded souls. Enjoy.

[JBI]

I'm not lonely because I read so much, I read so much because I'm lonely. Of course I wouldn't abandon books even if I had some kind of a social life, but loneliness has always been one of the most important reasons why I've read so much.

In elementary school I was always that lonely kid sitting alone on some corner of the schoolyard with a book, trying to turn the pages with mittens on her hands, waiting to get back to class. Later we didn't have to go out between the classes anymore, so I sat on the floor on the corridor reading. At least I always had the books to keep me company when no one else would talk to me :p

But yeah, if someone invited me somewhere, I wouldn't say "no" just because I'd prefer the company of a book :D

Heh, in elementary school I was the kid on top of the snow mountain pushing the other kids off.

Seriously though, that's kind of tragic, but I guess better than video games.

I dunno though, I feel like books act as poor substitutes - that's probably why I went more toward languages than literature - I think novels, in terms of character depth, really lack something - mind you, I love books, but in terms of ability, they don't talk back very easily - of course, poetry kind of does that, especially Shakespeare, who seems always talking to the audience, but it's kind of lonely only working from text.

[Annamariah]

Heh, in elementary school I was the kid on top of the snow mountain pushing the other kids off.
:lol: Good for you. There are few better pastimes than a good snow fight. Unfortunately at school it was forbidden to throw snowballs in the schoolyard :(


Seriously though, that's kind of tragic, but I guess better than video games.

I dunno though, I feel like books act as poor substitutes - that's probably why I went more toward languages than literature - I think novels, in terms of character depth, really lack something - mind you, I love books, but in terms of ability, they don't talk back very easily - of course, poetry kind of does that, especially Shakespeare, who seems always talking to the audience, but it's kind of lonely only working from text.
We never had any video games at home, so that was never an option :D

I'm a language student too, but it's not like grammar talks back to me either :lol:

I guess I just don't fit in with people of my own age. I find I've often got much more to talk about with people who are twice my age :p Whenever we went for a class trip at school, the others were sitting on the back of the bus having fun, and I was the one sitting on the front talking with the teachers.

[Scheherazade]

they don't talk back very easily "Very easily"? Mean to say if we tried hard enough, they would? ;)

However, easily or not, I think the fact that they do not talk back is what makes books great company for me! :D

As it is, there are very few people whose company I would sincerely and wholeheartedly prefer over a book's and I often feel that I am over-exposed to the outside world, hardly ever getting the "quality" time with my books.

I do realise that some people consider me "poor" company at times because I can burst out into long speeches about the books I have been reading or try to persuade them to read a book I have got carried away with but, then again, there are times I put up with their egocentricities as well. So, you give a little, get a little.

[Pollopicu]

"Very easily"? Mean to say if we tried hard enough, they would? ;)

However, easily or not, I think the fact that they do not talk back is what makes books great company for me! :D

As it is, there are very few people whose company I would sincerely and wholeheartedly prefer over a book's and I often feel that I am over-exposed to the outside world, hardly ever getting the "quality" time with my books.

I do realise that some people consider me "poor" company at times because I can burst out into long speeches about the books I have been reading or try to persuade them to read a book I have got carried away with but, then again, there are times I put up with their egocentricities as well. So, you give a little, get a little.


Why can't I meet people like you?

[LitNetIsGreat]

Hey, it sounds like there could be some lit net romance on the cards!:santasmil

I've never really thought about reading being an alternative to social engagement, but then actually it is an obvious retreat when you think about it. I still think that an healthy balance is the best way forward if you can achieve that, though it is not always that simple.


Yes it has! Unfortunately, in the public world, it is I who has suffered for my interest, not them. While I have gained knowledge, a broader view and the ability to hold an intelligent conversation, those who I’m surrounded by are now so damn boring that I would rather be alone. The more you know, the more you experience, the higher above the drones you rise, the only problem is, there are fewer people who rise with you on your journey.


Yes, I think this is interesting, I have been thinking about these comments. I take great delight in conversation with others, but most of the time I seem to float around in a world of my own. Instead of talking about what is really on mind, conversation seems limited to mundane things, everyday politics and drone-like activity, I just don't feel part of that world at all, but of course I live in it, and it drags me down - all the way down.

I've even started getting annoyed at conversations I overhear in public. Like those ridiculous public phone conversations people seem to enjoy having on the bus or train. Really, who on earth wants to hear some loser's prattle while on public transport?

The worst is though when you start to analyse other peoples' conversations. I tend to do this and I can't help it, you can see right through some people, right to their ugly souls and it leaves you hating humanity for a while. If it is not work conversations or bragging stories, it is something mind numbingly trivial usually involving a TV show, it rarely is anything of worth at all.

So with me many of those around me, in public etc, are not just mind numbingly boring, they are also becoming deeply annoying. I know this makes me sound like a grumpy old soul, but it is just how I feel at times, in reality I am quite fun (ish).

Anyway, this thread, and some of the comments reminds me of a beautiful sonnet by Keats:


O solitude! If I must with thee dwell,
Let it not be among the jumbled heap
Of murky buildings; climb with me the steep -
Nature's observatory - whence the dell,
Its flowery slopes, its river's crystal swell,
May seem a span; let me thy vigils keep
Mongst boughs pavilioned, where the deer's swift leap
Startles the wild bee from the foxglove bell.
But though I'll gladly trace these scenes with thee,
Yet the sweet converse of an innocent mind,
Whose words are images of thoughts refined,
Is my soul's pleasure; and it sure must be
Almost the highest bliss of human-kind,
When to thy haunts two kindred spirits flee.

Very apt I think.

[grotto]

Reading speaks to me where others don’t, as if those who wrote could also find no one to speak to. When I read, if find ideas that I once thought were mine alone are not, I can find other voices where I once remained hidden among the drones. Where once I felt very lonely, now I feel comfortable being alone and know that at times, I will find another to share what seems to be a lost art, the art of being a human with real human conditions as opposed to a social commodity with a big ego and the emotional depth of a shot glass.

Neely, I used to get annoyed at the over heard comments and phone conversation, now I get a kick out of it! I had a ball last Christmas eve sitting in a Starbucks reading for hours, drinking coffee and watch the crazy rush of people trying to buy last minute coffee gifts because they “had to buy something” and the frenzy so many people were in! I never had a better Christmas Eve! I think I’ll do it again this year! Yes, at 48 I may be alone, but with a book and what I have learned in life, I’m not lonely.

[Pollopicu]

Neely, I'm happily married. I meant "meet" as in someone to talk endlessly about books with. :)

I also find people's show-off attention-whorish cell phone conversations highly annoying. What i would really like to do is punch them in the face and calmly walk away as they lay on the ground, stunned.
I'm so sick and tired of having idle chit-chat, meaningless small talk with people I have nothing in common with. especially people who are so bland and unemotional. Give me a person with issues any day. I don't like people who are always nice and who always think everything is dandy...who turn the other cheek. That's why I prefer to read than to be with people. I can't relate to them, and they think I'm crabby and *****y. I'm mostly amazed that no one notices or cares how screwed up most people are. I can't take it. I refuse to do it anymore. If someone doesn't enhance my existence in time I'm talking to them, I have mini-nervous break-downs inside my mind.. I'm constantly promising myself it's the last time I stop and talk to someone just to be nice..but I continue doing it. So part of me is nice. I just kick myself later all the time.

So I read. Only in books and the internet I experience like-mindness. I have a couple friends I can be myself with, and I treasure them deeply, but even with them, I can't talk books with.

quote from the movie Ghost World:
Yeah, well it's simple for everybody else - give 'em a Big Mac and a pair of Nikes and they're happy! I just can't relate to 99.9% of humanity.

.

[Jozanny]

Not really. I was married at 21 (sorry girls) so it hasn't affected anything in that regards. Mrs Neely is quite relaxed, I have all the freedom I want in order to devote myself to whatever I choose.

Neely: All this time over the past year that I've posted with you I thought you were a British female Wilde groupie in your mid-20's who wants to write but doesn't. I will now have to accommodate myself to the fact that you are a British married male instructor, hopefully with your Wilde advocacy in tow. Sorry about that. Your avatar and user id led to my error, I suppose.:D

One thing I wanted to add about being well read and elitism: It isn't a bad thing to be well versed in what you care about, like stluke is in his fine arts, and I am in the business of publishing. Being driven to learn is what makes successful scholars and writers, though I am not sure if the trick works for painters or sculptors or musicians in the same way.

[Mathor]

i have always read pretty extensively and had a decent social life. I am a very spontaneous person, so sometimes i will go a week where all i do is read, sometimes i'll go a week where all I do is spend time with friends.

[DanielBenoit]

^I share the same sentiments. It's been a week since I've progressed in a chapter of "The Idiot" and I'm so ashamed :eek:




Anyway, this thread, and some of the comments reminds me of a beautiful sonnet by Keats:



Very apt I think.

Such a beautiful poem. God it's rhytme just took me away.

[Jozanny]

sometimes i'll go a week where all I do is spend time with friends.

If you have any who are relatively well educated in their 40's I'll take them out on loan. I am happy to be writing again but I am horridly bored, and in my past struggles with holding onto traditional employment, I could feel guilty when I failed, but now that guilt would be wasted, given my age with my disability. I am not superwoman, can't drive, and have to be realistic, but new paths to still feeling engaged, these don't come easy.

[stlukesguild]

One thing I wanted to add about being well read and elitism: It isn't a bad thing to be well versed in what you care about, like stluke is in his fine arts, and I am in the business of publishing. Being driven to learn is what makes successful scholars and writers, though I am not sure if the trick works for painters or sculptors or musicians in the same way.

Clearly not in exactly the same way, JoZ... Writers and scholars deal in words and ideas... conveyed verbally. Painters and sculptors deal in images, colors, textures, lines, shapes, forms... a visual vocabulary. Musicians obviously deal in the language of sounds. There are points of commonality, and the various arts obviously feed off of each other... but they are not exactly the same, either. For this reason it is extremely rare to come across the artist who is incredibly talented in more than one art form. There are few William Blakes or Richard Wagners in history.

I don't know that books really affected my social life in any detrimental manner... although my wife (who is not a big reader) might suggest that she could do without living in a library. Seriously, I was not a real bibliophile until later in life. I was more into sports and the arts... doing and making "things"... but I always had the ability to learn and memorize quickly and the insatiable appetite to know all that I could and so I probably did end up reading far more than the average person. My obsessions, however, have never been limited to reading. I am as obsessed with music and art as I am with books and have a collection of art books and CDs to rival my library. I was somewhat torn as to where to place my efforts after graduating from grade school... although music was quickly eliminated as a possibility considering I had no musical talent whatsoever. I have always been able to write and draw well, but I believe I ended up choosing the visual arts over the literary because I had some examples around me of people making art in some way as adults where writing and literature was largely foreign to my family experience. Besides... artists got to sit around in garrets or in little bistros in Paris wearing berets and sipping red wine (or absinthe) and got paid for drawing naked girls all day. The choice was obvious.:D:redface:

[LitNetIsGreat]

Neely, I'm happily married. I meant "meet" as in someone to talk endlessly about books with. :)


Oh yes, I was just joking, I know what you mean. Nice quote.


Neely: All this time over the past year that I've posted with you I thought you were a British female Wilde groupie in your mid-20's who wants to write but doesn't. I will now have to accommodate myself to the fact that you are a British married male instructor, hopefully with your Wilde advocacy in tow. Sorry about that. Your avatar and user id led to my error, I suppose.:D


Pah, female indeed! My avatar is supposed to be Dorian Gray, and looks about as miserable as me most of the time. No, I am a fine example of the male specimen.


Besides... artists got to sit around in garrets or in little bistros in Paris wearing berets and sipping red wine (or absinthe) and got paid for drawing naked girls all day. The choice was obvious.:D:redface:

Ah, wish I could draw too...:nod:

[prendrelemick]

This is a cracking thread. (thats good, by the way)

I recognise so much of what has been said here, I work among farmers, labourers, digger drivers and the like. These people are not unintelligent, they have philosophies and opinions and are well able to articulate them. They can share a joke and bandy words back and forth with native cleverness. I was born and raised among them, but sometimes feel apart- because of where my reading has taken me.

I would not say that literature has raised me above the common herd, thats not right at all, but it has placed me slightly to one side of it, the position of an observer rather than a participant.

[grotto]

I would not say that literature has raised me above the common herd, thats not right at all, but it has placed me slightly to one side of it, the position of an observer rather than a participant.

I like that! Well said!

[Desolation]

This is a cracking thread. (thats good, by the way)

I recognise so much of what has been said here, I work among farmers, labourers, digger drivers and the like. These people are not unintelligent, they have philosophies and opinions and are well able to articulate them. They can share a joke and bandy words back and forth with native cleverness. I was born and raised among them, but sometimes feel apart- because of where my reading has taken me.

I would not say that literature has raised me above the common herd, thats not right at all, but it has placed me slightly to one side of it, the position of an observer rather than a participant.
I can kind of relate to that...I live in a little farming community, and as such, I currently go to college with a bunch of farmers, cowboys, ranchers, and the like. I would be surprised if any other student on the whole campus has ever heard the name Dostoevsky.

[prendrelemick]

I know what you mean, although I am occasionally suprised, like finding a plasterer working to classical music, or a farmers wife who has a degree in English Lit.

-Do you prefer reading than going out and meeting new people?

No. Not usually.

-Has reading (material or frequency) affected your romantic relationships? if so how?

Yes. My wife gets annoyed if I'm reading and she's trying to tell me something 'interesting' (gossip.)

-Do friends and strangers judge you by your choice in literature? have you lost any friends for this reason?

Yes/No. Friends think I'm a bit odd, and poke fun at me. (I give as good as I get) But I have never lost friends.

[Mariamosis]

I must admit that I am slightly confused. With each page that I read and each book I finish I seem to grasp a better understanding of human nature rather than become dumbfounded.

Books help me to understand why people enjoy mindnumbing phone conversations and endless ramblings about the weather. I now get why people freak out on Black Friday and are willing to fight over some object they don't need or want.

I used to get annoyed and frustrated with the incessant prattle and was unable to grasp why people found this to be relevant amusement. Books seemed to help me understand and allow myself to relate on a wider range of human connectivity.

The reason people are lonely is because they close themselves off and don't provide opportunities for others to reach out to them. There are plenty of people who will snub you whether you open yourself up or not, yet there are also just as many people who would welcome you.

You also can't expect everyone to enjoy what you enjoy. People are diverse and diversity is fundamental to society. If someone walked up to you and began explaining in depth the concept of carbon bonding or enterpreneurship in China I am guessing after a few minutes you would be searching for an escape.

Characters in novels allowed me to see other perspectives, but books such as Dalai Lama's 'Art of Happiness' and Desmond Morris's 'The Human Zoo' and 'The Naked Ape' really helped me to comprehend this idea.

[JBI]

I think there is a big difference between the way reading poetry affects one's social life and personal relationships, versus novels.

Novels, to me at least, seem far more anti-social; poetry is obsessed with the notion of sharing - it originally was a spoken form, and up until the Victorian Era pretty much, seems to have been written for reading out loud.

Novels on the other hand, to me, seem to always imply solitude; one cannot get absorbed into the diegesis of the text without somehow abandoning their footing in the real world.

I think such a distinction is really necessary - the world of poetry seems built around discussions amongst certain personages - the poets themselves, the people reading the books, the people who show up to poetry readings - whereas novels, from the beginning, seem to have been designed for the sake of filling up time, and isolating people - first bourgeois women, now for the most part women in general. The goal of the novel is really commercial - it's a catalog genre more than anything, where one is trained to sit in isolation for long hours.

Not saying one is better than the other, though obviously my preference is for poetry, but it's interesting to look at - to what extent do genres try to remove their readers from the real world, and to what extent do they isolate them?


I must admit that I am slightly confused. With each page that I read and each book I finish I seem to grasp a better understanding of human nature rather than become dumbfounded.

Books help me to understand why people enjoy mindnumbing phone conversations and endless ramblings about the weather. I now get why people freak out on Black Friday and are willing to fight over some object they don't need or want.

I used to get annoyed and frustrated with the incessant prattle and was unable to grasp why people found this to be relevant amusement. Books seemed to help me understand and allow myself to relate on a wider range of human connectivity.


I don't know - I would tend to think that books just keep asking questions, and never give real answers. As for knowing more about human nature, I think books just seem to tell me that there is really no such thing - the wide range of texts just ask thousands of questions, yet never give answers. Generally one gets the feeling that they know less, because they are less sure of themselves, and what they know after reading texts than before.

[Mariamosis]

I think there is a big difference between the way reading poetry affects one's social life and personal relationships, versus novels.

Novels, to me at least, seem far more anti-social; poetry is obsessed with the notion of sharing - it originally was a spoken form, and up until the Victorian Era pretty much, seems to have been written for reading out loud.

Novels on the other hand, to me, seem to always imply solitude; one cannot get absorbed into the diegesis of the text without somehow abandoning their footing in the real world.

I think such a distinction is really necessary - the world of poetry seems built around discussions amongst certain personages - the poets themselves, the people reading the books, the people who show up to poetry readings - whereas novels, from the beginning, seem to have been designed for the sake of filling up time, and isolating people - first bourgeois women, now for the most part women in general. The goal of the novel is really commercial - it's a catalog genre more than anything, where one is trained to sit in isolation for long hours.

Not saying one is better than the other, though obviously my preference is for poetry, but it's interesting to look at - to what extent do genres try to remove their readers from the real world, and to what extent do they isolate them?

You have a very good point. I suppose it depends on how we view the novel and in what way we process the information related through the novel. I am solitary while reading, yet I use the information and ideas that the novel gives me to interact with society.


I don't know - I would tend to think that books just keep asking questions, and never give real answers. As for knowing more about human nature, I think books just seem to tell me that there is really no such thing - the wide range of texts just ask thousands of questions, yet never give answers. Generally one gets the feeling that they know less, because they are less sure of themselves, and what they know after reading texts than before.

For me books point out the differences and sometimes personify the reasons for certain human tendencies. Under normal circumstances I may have trouble being sympathetic or empathetic towards an alcoholic, however, a novel may convey the means of understanding the condition and the various reasons for alcoholism through empathy.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I must admit that I am slightly confused. With each page that I read and each book I finish I seem to grasp a better understanding of human nature rather than become dumbfounded.

Books help me to understand why people enjoy mindnumbing phone conversations and endless ramblings about the weather. I now get why people freak out on Black Friday and are willing to fight over some object they don't need or want.

I used to get annoyed and frustrated with the incessant prattle and was unable to grasp why people found this to be relevant amusement. Books seemed to help me understand and allow myself to relate on a wider range of human connectivity.

The reason people are lonely is because they close themselves off and don't provide opportunities for others to reach out to them. There are plenty of people who will snub you whether you open yourself up or not, yet there are also just as many people who would welcome you.

You also can't expect everyone to enjoy what you enjoy. People are diverse and diversity is fundamental to society. If someone walked up to you and began explaining in depth the concept of carbon bonding or enterpreneurship in China I am guessing after a few minutes you would be searching for an escape.

Characters in novels allowed me to see other perspectives, but books such as Dalai Lama's 'Art of Happiness' and Desmond Morris's 'The Human Zoo' and 'The Naked Ape' really helped me to comprehend this idea.

It has nothing to do with not understanding people, I understand them perfectly, too well, it has more to do with seeing into their ugliness and feeling their ignorance and disliking that.

I do not expect, or want, everybody to like the same things as I do, and I am all too perfectly aware of the many things I am ignorant about, in terms of other subject areas (or even my own) but at least I am aware of my own ignorance and not just ignorant in itself, or rude, or vile, or selfish - ugliness, it is there all around and I can't stand it.

(:idea: Bad day at the "office"= yes.)

[Pollopicu]

I do not expect, or want, everybody to like the same things as I do, and I am all too perfectly aware of the many things I am ignorant about, in terms of other subject areas (or even my own) but at least I am aware of my own ignorance and not just ignorant in itself, or rude, or vile, or selfish - ugliness, it is there all around and I can't stand it.


I agree.
I don't care what people do in their OWN life. They can slit their wrists, do drugs, screw their sisters till their hearts are content. They are certainly allowed to have their own beliefs and their own way of living. It's when their filth seeps out into the decent world of people who make the effort to contribute to a civilized society are affected by their ignorance. They continually force others to live the way they live. Disregarding the choices we make in our own lives to live in a better society. :flare: it.burns.me.up.
When i try to explain this to people, they say that everyone is allowed to be "free", yet their "freedom" is what takes away "our freedom". The way we live our lives, does not infringe upon trash's lives.



I'm telling you, I can write a ****ing book on this. I have a whole philosophy about all the things I feel has affected our society. Starting with bad parents, and the media. Our values in America are ****. I rather have a government where strong moral codes are enforced. And I'm not talking about religion or politics. I'm talking about common decency. Having manners ffs.
Unfortunately I happen to have been born during the generation me era, but I despise this generation with the fury of a thousand demons. The arrogance, audacity, entitlement is outrageous. I have no sympathy for anyone who behaves like that. There is no excuse. The slobs of today, simply don't care. They just exist. That's all they do. They contribute nothing to cultural society, or any good society for that matter.

[Mariamosis]

It has nothing to do with not understanding people, I understand them perfectly, too well, it has more to do with seeing into their ugliness and feeling their ignorance and disliking that.

I do not expect, or want, everybody to like the same things as I do, and I am all too perfectly aware of the many things I am ignorant about, in terms of other subject areas (or even my own) but at least I am aware of my own ignorance and not just ignorant in itself, or rude, or vile, or selfish - ugliness, it is there all around and I can't stand it.

(:idea: Bad day at the "office"= yes.)

People are not inherently vile and evil; people do vile and evil acts. Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart, for his purity, by definition, is unassailable. Most of these people are not selfish, vile, rude and evil; they are very good people with a skewed view of morals, therefore, they do not irritate me and I realize that I must also be ignorant of the vile deeds I commit unconsciously.


I agree.
I don't care what people do in their OWN life. They can slit their wrists, do drugs, screw their sisters till their hearts are content. They are certainly allowed to have their own beliefs and their own way of living. It's when their filth seeps out into the decent world of people who make the effort to contribute to a civilized society are affected by their ignorance. They continually force others to live the way they live. Disregarding the choices we make in our own lives to live in a better society. :flare: it.burns.me.up.
When i try to explain this to people, they say that everyone is allowed to be "free", yet their "freedom" is what takes away "our freedom". The way we live our lives, does not infringe upon trash's lives.



I'm telling you, I can write a ****ing book on this. I have a whole philosophy about all the things I feel has affected our society. Starting with bad parents, and the media. Our values in America are ****. I rather have a government where strong moral codes are enforced. And I'm not talking about religion or politics. I'm talking about common decency. Having manners ffs.
Unfortunately I happen to have been born during the generation me era, but I despise this generation with the fury of a thousand demons. The arrogance, audacity, entitlement is outrageous. I have no sympathy for anyone who behaves like that. There is no excuse. The slobs of today, simply don't care. They just exist. That's all they do. They contribute nothing to cultural society, or any good society for that matter.

Understanding is more important than anger. You must first ask why people are the way they are before explaining how.

“Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.”

[LitNetIsGreat]

People are not inherently vile and evil; people do vile and evil acts. Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart, for his purity, by definition, is unassailable. Most of these people are not selfish, vile, rude and evil; they are very good people with a skewed view of morals, therefore, they do not irritate me and I realize that I must also be ignorant of the vile deeds I commit unconsciously.


Understanding is more important than anger. You must first ask why people are the way they are before explaining how.

“Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.”

I know the (Buddhist) theory, but the practicality is sometimes very different. I would also disagree with the comment that people aren't selfish, I think in essence they are.

[Mariamosis]

I know the (Buddhist) theory, but the practicality is sometimes very different. I would also disagree with the comment that people aren't selfish, I think in essence they are.

I am by no means Buddhist, however, turning that specific theory into an individual dispostion is very attainable.

I feel that people commit selfish acts, but justify their means.

[Pollopicu]

We're on two different levels is consciousness.

Why would I want to understand why certain people are selfish? it doesn't stop them from being low-lives. obviously, they are grown adults who chose to be this way.


And why imagine to see virtues in people who don't possess an ounce of it and who are proud of not caring to have it?
I will not walk around in a Buddhist daze, pretending people are not what they fully intend and choose to be. yes, they choose to be.

To me it is more insane to not let it bother you, because that allows people to think their behavior is ok, and it's not. This is reality. We all have to live together. Why should I (decent person) have to adopt a stepford-like mentality in order to have inner peace, while these people (trash) go on with no cares in the world, affecting my peace, my life? That's flabbergasting.

It's not that I don't posses spirituality, in fact I do. I light candles to saints and icons for prayers and guidance. I love meditation and yoga. However, I do those things for me. I don't use them as a blindfold.

[Mariamosis]

We're on two different levels is consciousness.

Why would I want to understand why certain people are selfish? it doesn't stop them from being low-lives. obviously, they are grown adults who chose to be this way.


And why imagine to see virtues in people who don't possess an ounce of it and who are proud of not caring to have it?
I will not walk around in a Buddhist daze, pretending people are not what they fully intend and choose to be. yes, they choose to be.

To me it is more insane to not let it bother you, because that allows people to think their behavior is ok, and it's not. This is reality. We all have to live together. Why should I (decent person) have to adopt a stepford-like mentality in order to have inner peace, while these people (trash) go on with no cares in the world, affecting my peace, my life? That's flabbergasting.

It's not that I don't posses spirituality, in fact I do. I light candles to saints and icons for prayers and guidance. I love meditation and yoga. However, I do those things for me. I don't use them as a blindfold.

I have a handful of relatives that are selfish, thieves, deceptive, alcoholics, drug-addicts, and etc. I have lived with a few of them and have been treated badly and lost a good sum of money as well as my respect for them. You would consider them trash, freeloaders, and their lives to be of little value and in the past I would have agreed with you.

After countless arguments with them I have discerned that they believe they are doing the right thing for themselves and others. There is no convincing them. I now understand that they feel justified and I can never understand their reasoning.

Eventually I had to cut them off. They are not bad people because they do not understand they are doing wrong, hence, they and myself are on two different levels of consciousness, however, that doesn't mean I am going to put myself in a position to be hurt by them.

You can't blame a cat for killing a mouse when he has no concept of the immorality of his action.

By the way: Calling people low-lives and trash is an act of selfishness when it boosts your sense of righteousness over another.

[grotto]

Empathy is a simple word that is very hard to truly understand and the more I read, the more I understand it. I have gained the ability to make conscious choices, there are many who can not, I too was once like that. That doesn’t put me on a higher level, it comes with it’s own burdens and I can’t expect others to meet me on my level.

[Mariamosis]

Empathy is a simple word that is very hard to truly understand and the more I read, the more I understand it. I have gained the ability to make conscious choices, there are many who can not, I too was once like that. That doesn’t put me on a higher level, it comes with it’s own burdens and I can’t expect others to meet me on my level.
Touche!

[Pollopicu]

I have a handful of relatives that are selfish, thieves, deceptive, alcoholics, drug-addicts, and etc. I have lived with a few of them and have been treated badly and lost a good sum of money as well as my respect for them. You would consider them trash, freeloaders, and their lives to be of little value and in the past I would have agreed with you.

After countless arguments with them I have discerned that they believe they are doing the right thing for themselves and others. There is no convincing them. I now understand that they feel justified and I can never understand their reasoning.

Eventually I had to cut them off. They are not bad people because they do not understand they are doing wrong, hence, they and myself are on two different levels of consciousness, however, that doesn't mean I am going to put myself in a position to be hurt by them.

You can't blame a cat for killing a mouse when he has no concept of the immorality of his action.

By the way: Calling people low-lives and trash is an act of selfishness when it boosts your sense of righteousness over another.

But I am right.
I may be selfish in certain ways, but my selfishness doesn't affect how people live. It doesn't encroach on them. So the selfish you're describing is different than the selfishness of people who's selfishness affects others, everyday.
I'm giving, considerate and compassionate, to the deserving.

[Mariamosis]

But I am right.
I may be selfish in certain ways, but my selfishness doesn't affect how people live. It doesn't encroach on them. So the selfish you're describing is different than the selfishness of people who's selfishness affects others, everyday.
I'm giving, considerate and compassionate, to the deserving.

Generally people do not enjoy being called trash, and therefore would carry that negatively around with them throughout the day. That is an example of encroaching on someone.

[Pollopicu]

But why are they called "trash" in the first place?

and if they don't like being called trash, why do they behave like trash?

Why is it wrong to point out the obvious?

This is why our society is becoming more and more dystopian. Trash together with people who try to excuse and "understand" their behavior. forget about it. It's like the madhatters tea party. you live in ****, yet God forbid you call it ****.
Don't you see you're empowering filth? Don't you want to live on a better earth? I certainly don't want the walls closing in on me more than they have been the last 10 years. Am i to just be content with the circus that is growing around us? at what point do you say, "wait, this is ridiculous?". At what point?

[Mariamosis]

But why are they called "trash" in the first place?

and if they don't like being called trash, why do they behave like trash?

Why is it wrong to point out the obvious?

This is why our society is becoming more and more dystopian. Trash together with people who try to excuse and "understand" their behavior. forget about it. It's like the madhatters tea party. you live in ****, yet God forbid you call it ****.
Don't you see you're empowering filth? Don't you want to live on a better earth? I certainly don't want the walls closing in on me more than they have been the last 10 years. Am i to just be content with the circus that is growing around us? at what point do you say, "wait, this is ridiculous?". At what point?

I refuse to submit to the idea that due to circumstances people are put in or opportunities that people did not have they should be dubbed as filth.

It is important to understand why people do the things they do and if society does not try to understand individuals and their psychology then society will consequently have a weak infastructure. The cause is a direct correlation of the effect that will be produced.

[shapeshifter_]

well, i could not wait to read the whole arguement here due to the disagreement on the reading and its effects to our social life. i love reading as we all do. and i buy books, as we all do. and sometimes when i am in the dnr (a wonderland of books in turkey :D ) other people who love reading come start a conversation with me about the books. later, i take these books to school, as we all do. and i meet new people when they ask me about the book i am reading. and i argue with my new friend on the books. and this makes me a social beeing :D c'mon! one who reads well can understand people better. cuz we deal with the characters, think on the plots and the inner thoughts of the heroes or heroins, etc. who can understand people as well as we do? i need to assert that those gone with the books can get on well with people and be social too. :)

[wat??]

{edit}

Well anyway Pollopicu and various other members posting in this thread what exactly do you think puts you so above everyone else? You're obviously not even real misanthropes if you're going out of your way to talk to people on a forum board.

[Pollopicu]

What are misanthropes suppose to do with their lives? Live in the bush, in Mankato? Are you even familiar with the characteristics of a misanthrope? I think you're confusing it with some kind of social phobia. They're not the same.
I need things. I have to live my life the best I know how. Doesn't mean I have to get along or agree with anyone. I just do what I need to do, and go where I need to go.

Have you ever heard of Florence King? I wonder how she was even able to get out of her house and network enough to get a book published...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_King


Being a misanthrope is not about thinking you're better than anyone. It's about wondering why people wouldn't want to be better themselves as a society. Look around you, everything is disgusting filth. How can people accept this way of living? how come no one has started a revolution? I'm so grossed out by society, it's not even funny. I can't even stand to look out the window.
I would actually enjoy the company of people if I met any one worth speaking to. It's not that I hate every person I meet. I'm mostly disgusted my humanity, society, the herd mentality.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Well said Poll. :thumbs_up

[wat??]

What are misanthropes suppose to do with their lives? Live in the bush, in Mankato? Are you even familiar with the characteristics of a misanthrope? I think you're confusing it with some kind of social phobia. They're not the same.
I need things. I have to live my life the best I know how. Doesn't mean I have to get along or agree with anyone. I just do what I need to do, and go where I need to go.

Have you ever heard of Florence King? I wonder how she was even able to get out of her house and network enough to get a book published...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_King


Being a misanthrope is not about thinking you're better than anyone. It's about wondering why people wouldn't want to be better themselves as a society. Look around you, everything is disgusting filth. How can people accept this way of living? how come no one has started a revolution? I'm so grossed out by society, it's not even funny. I can't even stand to look out the window.
I would actually enjoy the company of people if I met any one worth speaking to. It's not that I hate every person I meet. I'm mostly disgusted my humanity, society, the herd mentality.

Nothing puts you above the 'herd'. You're actually a member of a slightly different herd, and not necessarily a superior or more worthy herd at that.

"how come no one has started a revolution?"

'How come' you haven't started a revolution then [edit]?

Attention everyone in this thread currently under the impression that you are somehow superior to the rest of the world because you have a few Dostoyevsky novels under your belt.

Get over yourself. That is all.

[Pollopicu]

Nothing puts you above the 'herd'. You're actually a member of a slightly different herd, and not necessarily a superior or more worthy herd at that.

"how come no one has started a revolution?"

'How come' you haven't started a revolution then [edit]?

Attention everyone in this thread currently under the impression that you are somehow superior to the rest of the world because you have a few Dostoyevsky novels under your belt.

Get over yourself. That is all.

..What does Dostoyevsky have to do with it? where did that come from?

It seems like someone has a mayor chip on their shoulder. You sound just as bitter as I am. Never once did I say I was better than anyone. Why is being disgusted with society equals superiority? Am I suppose to trash myself down so people don't take offense to my convictions?

Every year, every week, every day I fight for what I believe in. Having this discussion with you right now IS my revolution.

[Desolation]

Nothing puts you above the 'herd'. You're actually a member of a slightly different herd, and not necessarily a superior or more worthy herd at that.

"how come no one has started a revolution?"

'How come' you haven't started a revolution then [edit]?

Attention everyone in this thread currently under the impression that you are somehow superior to the rest of the world because you have a few Dostoyevsky novels under your belt.

Get over yourself. That is all.
Surely you must be aware that you are talking to down to us. It could be argued that your alleged humbleness makes you feel superior.

I think your point about Dostoevsky is a reference to my post about how I doubt that anyone at my school has read Dostoevsky. I'm not trying to claim any superiority(in fact, many of the cowboys that I go to school with are smarter than I am). It's just a point about not being able to relate to anyone. And I think that Pollopicu's hatred of society is in the same vain, it's not about being better or above, it's just about being different and/or alienated from the people around you for whatever reasons.

[Zee.]

..What does Dostoyevsky have to do with it? where did that come from?

It seems like someone has a mayor chip on their shoulder. You sound just as bitter as I am. Never once did I say I was better than anyone. Why is being disgusted with society equals superiority? Am I suppose to trash myself down so people don't take offense to my convictions?

Every year, every week, every day I fight for what I believe in. Having this discussion with you right now IS my revolution.

I understand your view, and to a degree, I support it. I can not stand rudeness, general bad manners and disrespect. I don't think most people like it either. However, and I am sorry for any offense this may cause, you sound incredibly ignorant. Anyone can moan and complain about how "bad" and how disgusting the world is, but what are they, what are you - doing to change it? Calling people "trash" is such a write off, and incredibly disrespectful. We are who we are for a reason. We are shaped by our environment and experiences. You don't know why those you dub "trash" are the way they are. And tell me, have you ever tried to understand them? I'm not making excuses for anybody, but if people aren't given the opportunity, patience and support to make necessay changes - to learn, to be educated, then how can you expect them to be anything other than "trash". Hate it, think it's unfair, cry and scream all you want, the fact remains that many of them don't know any better. Education is key. It's not them, I am ashamed of, it's people such as yourself who write them off as "trash" so easily, that make me feel ashamed. Your "revolution" is selfish. Your ignorance and bitterness does them less harm than it does you. Whether you like it or not, the responsibility of change rests with you as much as it rests with them. Hatred and ignorance and bitterness is counter productive. People just tend to despise what they do not understand.

[wat??]

..What does Dostoyevsky have to do with it? where did that come from?

It seems like someone has a mayor chip on their shoulder. You sound just as bitter as I am. Never once did I say I was better than anyone. Why is being disgusted with society equals superiority? Am I suppose to trash myself down so people don't take offense to my convictions?

Every year, every week, every day I fight for what I believe in. Having this discussion with you right now IS my revolution.

Merely an example. Pseudo intellectuals tend to view their knowledge of literature (which generally extends only to a few very well known authors, such as Dostoyevsky.) as something that separates them (and it's impossible not to note the implication of superiority here) from the 'herd'.

I sincerely hope by the way that your listed age is not accurate.

[Dirtbag]

Being a misanthrope is not about thinking you're better than anyone. It's about wondering why people wouldn't want to be better themselves as a society. Look around you, everything is disgusting filth. How can people accept this way of living? how come no one has started a revolution? I'm so grossed out by society, it's not even funny. I can't even stand to look out the window.
What is this filth you're talking about? I'm half heartedly disappointed that I live in such a classy country that practices human rights and has a mostly reliable government. When I walk through my neighbourhood, I see people that have used the advances in civilization to be happy and to live stable lives. To be sheltered and fed. To find love and to be healthy. I have nothing to fight for. Everyone's happy. Everyone watches tv.

[wat??]

I understand your view, and to a degree, I support it. I can not stand rudeness, general bad manners and disrespect. I don't think most people like it either. However, and I am sorry for any offense this may cause, you sound incredibly ignorant. Anyone can moan and complain about how "bad" and how disgusting the world is, but what are they, what are you - doing to change it? Calling people "trash" is such a write off, and incredibly disrespectful. We are who we are for a reason. We are shaped by our environment and experiences. You don't know why those you dub "trash" are the way they are. And tell me, have you ever tried to understand them? I'm not making excuses for anybody, but if people aren't given the opportunity, patience and support to make necessay changes - to learn, to be educated, then how can you expect them to be anything other than "trash". Hate it, think it's unfair, cry and scream all you want, the fact remains that many of them don't know any better. Education is key. It's not them, I am ashamed of, it's people such as yourself who write them off as "trash" so easily, that make me feel ashamed. Your "revolution" is selfish. Your ignorance and bitterness does them less harm than it does you. Whether you like it or not, the responsibility of change rests with you as much as it rests with them. Hatred and ignorance and bitterness is counter productive. People just tend to despise what they do not understand.

!

(well I need at least five characters, though I thought that the exclamation point really spoke for itself).

[Drkshadow03]

Attention everyone in this thread currently under the impression that you are somehow superior to the rest of the world because you have a few Dostoyevsky novels under your belt.

Get over yourself. That is all.

Heh. That would be ironic too since Dostoevsky criticizes that exact behavior in Crime and Punishment through Raskolnikov.

[Mariamosis]

Desolation and Pollopicu, I believe that these few sentences would be a fine specimen of Pollopicu's feelings of superiority.


Why should I (decent person) have to adopt a stepford-like mentality in order to have inner peace, while these people (trash) go on with no cares in the world, affecting my peace, my life? That's flabbergasting.

As I understand there is a large degree of difference between the term 'decent person' and 'trash', hence the tone of sovereignty.

I understand feeling left out or alienated, but will never understand others being deemed as trash or filth. This verbage implies the need of disposal.

[Scheherazade]

.
R e m i n d e r

Please keep in mind that we are here to discuss the ideas, not the people.

Further personal/inflammatory comments will be removed.

_

[Jozanny]

.
R e m i n d e r

Please keep in mind that we are here to discuss the ideas, not the people.

_

Are you trying to tell me that avatars get in the way of personal relationships too? Or are we twins for the month?;)

[Mariamosis]

.
R e m i n d e r

Please keep in mind that we are here to discuss the ideas, not the people.

Further personal/inflammatory comments will be removed.

_

Thank you!

[Pollopicu]

I understand your view, and to a degree, I support it. I can not stand rudeness, general bad manners and disrespect. I don't think most people like it either. However, and I am sorry for any offense this may cause, you sound incredibly ignorant. Anyone can moan and complain about how "bad" and how disgusting the world is, but what are they, what are you - doing to change it? Calling people "trash" is such a write off, and incredibly disrespectful. We are who we are for a reason. We are shaped by our environment and experiences. You don't know why those you dub "trash" are the way they are. And tell me, have you ever tried to understand them? I'm not making excuses for anybody, but if people aren't given the opportunity, patience and support to make necessay changes - to learn, to be educated, then how can you expect them to be anything other than "trash". Hate it, think it's unfair, cry and scream all you want, the fact remains that many of them don't know any better. Education is key. It's not them, I am ashamed of, it's people such as yourself who write them off as "trash" so easily, that make me feel ashamed. Your "revolution" is selfish. Your ignorance and bitterness does them less harm than it does you. Whether you like it or not, the responsibility of change rests with you as much as it rests with them. Hatred and ignorance and bitterness is counter productive. People just tend to despise what they do not understand.

Your objections to my arguements and beliefs are not more valid simply because you claim to empathize with me. Nice try.
If you believe so much in trying to "understand" people before judging them, then obviously you're not practicing what you preach because you took the first opportunity to jump down my throat and call me ignorant. Yet I can't call people trash. That's pretty hypocritical, don't you think?
You claim my revolution is selfish, but the trash of the world gets to go out and live their life with total disregard for those around them, and you don't call that selfish? and I'm being accused of being selfish simply because I'm standing up against it.
I don't just sit here on forum complaining about how screwed up the world is without doing more than my share to actually help change it. Every action of my existence is dedicated to help make the world a better place. It's just hard when you have the trash, and people like you who defend trash. It's like swimming up stream. Obviously I hit a nerve, so it makes you wonder.






Merely an example. Pseudo intellectuals tend to view their knowledge of literature (which generally extends only to a few very well known authors, such as Dostoyevsky.) as something that separates them (and it's impossible not to note the implication of superiority here) from the 'herd'.

I sincerely hope by the way that your listed age is not accurate.

Pseudo intellectuals...and Dostoyevsky.

Obviously you're exhibiting superiority behavior just by the post above. You have it in your mind that anyone who reads Dostoyevsky does so to pretend to be smart. To be quite honest with you, I haven't even read Dostoyevsky yet. I just bought two novels withing the past 2 weeks to read within the next month. Unlike you, I'm reading Dostoyevsky for the same reason I have read any other novel. I think you're exposing the ugly inner insecure part of yourself more than you're attempting to expose of mine.
Maybe you should put your precious Dostoyevsky down for a minute and check yourself. You're not that smart, sweetheart. Not yet.




What is this filth you're talking about? I'm half heartedly disappointed that I live in such a classy country that practices human rights and has a mostly reliable government. When I walk through my neighbourhood, I see people that have used the advances in civilization to be happy and to live stable lives. To be sheltered and fed. To find love and to be healthy. I have nothing to fight for. Everyone's happy. Everyone watches tv.

haha, where do you live? In the US?


Desolation and Pollopicu, I believe that these few sentences would be a fine specimen of Pollopicu's feelings of superiority.



As I understand there is a large degree of difference between the term 'decent person' and 'trash', hence the tone of sovereignty.

I understand feeling left out or alienated, but will never understand others being deemed as trash or filth. This verbage implies the need of disposal.
Yes, disposal!! I love that idea.

[wat??]

Pseudo intellectuals...and Dostoyevsky.

Obviously you're exhibiting superiority behavior just by the post above. You have it in your mind that anyone who reads Dostoyevsky does so to pretend to be smart. To be quite honest with you, I haven't even read Dostoyevsky yet. I just bought two novels withing the past 2 weeks to read within the next month. Unlike you, I'm reading Dostoyevsky for the same reason I have read any other novel. I think you're exposing the ugly inner insecure part of yourself more than you're attempting to expose of mine.
Maybe you should put your precious Dostoyevsky down for a minute and check yourself. You're not that smart, sweetheart. Not yet.



No I don't have that in my mind, it was simply an example. I don't want to continue this conversation with all you "misanthropic", "society hating" fourteen year old boys and girls. However I would like to state that when I was thirteen years old I did the exact same thing on forum boards. I think that being able to post somewhat intelligently (though in my opinion very ignorantly) implies a good level of general intelligence; and for what it's worth I think that when you're a few years older and finally wash your hands of these ideas you will be a very well reasoning individual. Good luck.

I never claimed to be particularly intelligent, by the way.

[grotto]

-Do you prefer reading than going out and meeting new people?

-Has reading (material or frequency) affected your romantic relationships? if so how?

-Do friends and strangers judge you by your choice in literature? have you lost any friends for this reason?

On a score from 1-10 (one being the least and 10 being the most) how much do you think reading affects your personal life in terms of meeting new people and closeness to your partner. Do you use reading as a buffer in your relationship?

In case anyone forgot, this was the original post, I don’t know how it has gotten to the point of social superiority due to knowledge and self-righteousness but we’re not doing a very good job of promoting reading with the current flow of personal attacks.

To the original post;
(1) Reading has improved my romantic life
(2) Yes, I get judged by my choice in reading material but, I haven’t lost friends because of it.
(3) Readings affect? A 10! I do not use reading as a buffer.
While true, I would much rather read than watch a spectator sport, I would always choose a good conversation over a book.

I know why I read now! I think I will go and do it.

[wat??]

If you don't know then you should really review the thread. It's really very clear.

[Scheherazade]

.

This thread is now closed due to certain members' inability to carry on a respectful discussion without resorting to inflammatory/personal comments.

Members who persistently display such attitude towards others will receive infraction points.

.