Russian literature

And if the emotions is before the statement, does it have more appeal?

:idea:Moby dick has certainly qualities that rivals any novel even written, even the without doubt, most influential of all, Don Quixote. It is as epic as Tolstoy and as deeply psychological as Dostoievisky at once.

Sounds how bad?

Start here, boyo:

I say that the Russians are the Best. Maybe this is my true opinion, maybe it's a bit hyperbole, maybe I know that it is impossible to say for a fact what is the best in terms of art, maybe I don't. I don't think it's a great crime, however, you are ready to indict me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

The Russians are the best because many (Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Solzhenitsyn etc) lived during totalitarian regimes who would kill you if they didn't like what you said.

And this is your indictment? Look at the start, you ask a rhetorical question, what does environment have to do with merit? Then you say 'even if it were true...' Even if WHAT were true?
This lacks even a small amount of sense.
Then you go into a diatribe about examples in history to show how very, very smart you are. Nice job, but I can't possibly care because of the poor start.
What does the environment that an artist works under have to do with the merit or lack of merit of his or her work? Even were this true, many other writers lived under equally oppressive conditions and in dangerous times. Dante was banished under penalty of death from his home of Florence as the result of shifts in politics. The great majority of the artists and writers of the Italian Renaissance worked for rapacious, violent, and vengeful rulers who were not far removed from the Latin-American drug lords of today... and this doesn't even begin to deal with the Church especially at the height of the Inquisition, the Witch Hunts, and the various religious wars that ripped through Europe. It is quite possible that Chaucer was a casualty of the coup which ousted Richard II and replaced him with Henry Bolingbroke and the bloodthirsty Thomas Arundel, Archbishop of Canterbury and later Lord Chamberlain (Who MUrdered Chaucer? A Medieval Mystery by Terry Jones, Robert Yeager, Terry Dolan, Alan Fletcher, and Juliette Dor). Thomas Kyd was arrested for alleged libelous and heretical writings and brutally tortured before being released. He died a year later at the age of 36. Christopher Marlowe, who shared lodgings with Kyd was also summoned before the courts but died in a bar-brawl (assassination?) with known government agents. Sir Thomas More was executed on trumped up charges of high treason. Sir Walter Raleigh was also executed upon trumped up charges of treason. Any number of other writers have dealt with arrest, banishment, imprisonment, jail time, institutionalization and execution for "crimes" ranging from mental illness, treason, profanity, and obscenity to homosexuality (John Clare, Torquado Tasso, Ovid, Seneca, Oscar Wilde, Holderlin, Verlaine, Jean Genet, etc...).

And Now, I say that much of their intention is cloaked within the deep, penetrating, heavy nature of their work.

Thus much of their intention is cloaked within the deep, penetrating, heavy nature of their work. In this way Dostoevsky criticized the Russian institutions, including the church, while evading execution.


You seem to think I said 'dark, brooding and heavy. You only got one out of three correct and missed my point entirely.
The fact that a work of literature is dark, brooding, and "heavy" in no way assures us that the same work is inherently "better" or more profound than many other "lighter" or humorous books. Of course that's a prejudice common to the young and inexperienced. Dostoevsky and Tolstoy are certainly great writers... but in no way are they (and their other Russian peers) clearly "better" than the strongest writers of France, Italy, Spain, Germany, England, Greece, etc... to say nothing of Indian, China, Japan, Persia, and the whole of the non-Western world.

---

Thus, in your quixotic fashion you are fighting a windmill that nobody ever built. Perhaps this means you are an even greater genius than you yourself can hope. But I doubt it.

So to be fair to the rest of the nice folks on this forum, if you’re going to go around nitpicking and attempting to force your vision of superior intellect on people, please, for the love literature, at least make sense. Generally speaking.

Are "Russian literature is the best" and "Russian literature is my favorite" synonymous? It seems to me that one attempts to make a general classification, the other expresses a personal preference.

Fyodor slipped sloppery...

The true greatest tradition of writers are the canadians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.lucifer

The true greatest tradition of writers are the canadians.

---

Canadians should stick to maple syrup and learn how to spell.

Quote:

---

Canadians should stick to maple syrup and learn how to spell.

---

Hey I'm Canadian! But yeah, we don't really have a great canon of literature.


Fyordor, Stlukes's post makes perfect sense. You're just pissed cuz he owned you with his "superior intellect." :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JCamilo

And if the emotions is before the statement, does it have more appeal?

:idea:Moby dick has certainly qualities that rivals any novel even written, even the without doubt, most influential of all, Don Quixote. It is as epic as Tolstoy and as deeply psychological as Dostoievisky at once.

Sounds how bad?

---

Emoticons make a writer look like an idiot who doesn't know how to use words. There is no proper way to use them which would make the user either look more intelligent, or improve his statement. The inclusion of emoticons in a message is the equivalent of juvenile netspeak such as lol or rofl. We already have a great medium for expressing ideas and feelings called "the word." This goes double on a literary forum devoted to the discussion of eloquence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

Emoticons make a writer look like an idiot who doesn't know how to use words. There is no proper way to use them which would make the user either look more intelligent, or improve his statement. The inclusion of emoticons in a message is the equivalent of juvenile netspeak such as lol or rofl. We already have a great medium for expressing ideas and feelings called "the word." This goes double on a literary forum devoted to the discussion of eloquence.

---

I reckon the smilies are kinda cute.

Emoticons make a writer look like an idiot who doesn't know how to use words. There is no proper way to use them which would make the user either look more intelligent, or improve his statement. The inclusion of emoticons in a message is the equivalent of juvenile netspeak such as lol or rofl. We already have a great medium for expressing ideas and feelings called "the word." This goes double on a literary forum devoted to the discussion of eloquence.

But remember, Mortal, I am a visual artist, so I don't underrate the image and overrate the "word" to the same extent as you... although admittedly, emoticons aren't the greatest of imagery. I'll try to dig up a good appropriate image next time just for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G L Wilson

Canadians should stick to maple syrup and learn how to spell.

---

Just for existing, the canadians are the greatest people in existence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

But remember, Mortal, I am a visual artist, so I don't underrate the image and overrate the "word" to the same extent as you... although admittedly, emoticons aren't the greatest of imagery. I'll try to dig up a good appropriate image next time just for you.

---

I know that. You are a special case; so I make allowances for all the pictures you throw up or the visual arts references you make. I also don't object to them to the same extent in other non-literary forums. There is nothing new about them, and in time I've grown to accept them as a regrettable part of internet culture, just as I've made peace with 1337, lolcats, Rickrolls, and multiple exclamation points. I just don't expect to encounter them in the comments of older more sophisticated posters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

I know that. You are a special case; so I make allowances for all the pictures you throw up or the visual arts references you make. I also don't object to them to the same extent in other non-literary forums. There is nothing new about them, and in time I've grown to accept them as a regrettable part of internet culture, just as I've made peace with 1337, lolcats, Rickrolls, and multiple exclamation points. I just don't expect to encounter them in the comments of older more sophisticated posters.

---

Come on man, Rickrolls and lolcats are priceless. Encyclopedia dramatica definitely has some literary merit. Its a like a modern devil's dictionary.

I don't like the question mark myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

Emoticons make a writer look like an idiot who doesn't know how to use words. There is no proper way to use them which would make the user either look more intelligent, or improve his statement. The inclusion of emoticons in a message is the equivalent of juvenile netspeak such as lol or rofl. We already have a great medium for expressing ideas and feelings called "the word." This goes double on a literary forum devoted to the discussion of eloquence.

---

:iagree: