Originally Posted by
JBI
It's interesting though how he is read, as an object of the polemic, as a failed philosopher. From my understanding traditionally he is given to students around the age of 17 or 18 in classrooms after they had previously done two or so years dealing mostly with Medieval through Classicist poetry - he comes at a time where I think he is most resonant; that is for instance, when I first read him, and his pseudo-philosophy seems to carry a dark, bitter truth. Similar to how American (male) young adults seem to like Beat Movement authors and stuff sometimes with a darker theme. Also similar to how Hamlet is treated in high schools I guess.
From an academic view though, I think he is read from above, rather than from within, or "overheard" as they say, rather than heard. So his life, philosophy, and poetry become a case study, rather than an actual literal expression; nobody I think seriously agrees with him, but we read him, from my understanding of how he is generally read, through the lens of curiosity. His dark and morbid themes are interesting for their dark, morbid images, and for his bitterness, rather than for their real intellectual discussion, in the formal sense of polemic.