I recently got that from the little free library by my house. Maybe old John is trying to secure his legacy and leaving copies of his books anywhere he can.
There is a fair chance it is forgotten book that has spent its allotted time in the lost and found already, this was most of the books in the library at the coffee shop I used to work at.
Is this book actually a comfy Tom Jones type book or does it go up its own arse?
Probably not what you want but who knows, I have yet to read it.
No lie. I’ve never taken a book from there only got rid of books. I know Dalkey is releasing it in a couple weeks so I figured I’d sample it and buy it if I like it
It’s a comfy book, Barth doesn’t get totally stuck up his own ass like in some of his more explicitly metafictional works. It’s a great book to pair with Mason & Dixon, and rather underrated on this board compared to it. It’s very fun, and very funny. I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote, where the length of the novel isn’t a drag but actually a joy to read.
Of all the moronic shit that gets posted on IQfy, this is probably my favorite genre.
>anon makes an unremarkable attempt at analyzing some aspect of a book >statement is perhaps banal but shows actual effort and interest, which puts it above 95% of posts on the board (excl. pure philosophy/religion discussion) at any given time >homosexual sees his chance to flex >hurrrrrrr that's SO obvious, what a rube you are for pointing it out! ha ha! >chilling effect on future attempts at analysis ensues >not even over an actual fricking disagreement
If I had the choice between getting rid of, on the one hand, all the incel debates, the race debates, the troony debates, the communism debates, the peterson debates, the BAP debates, the religion debates, and the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy; and, on the other hand, you; I would choose you. Those morons just distract and take up space, you're the one actively stamping out the tiny bit of green growing in a barren wasteland, because it's a wild daisy and not a perfectly cultivated rose. What an utterly contemptible spirit it must take to make a post like that.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>completely misses the point
The first anon seemed to be blissfully unaware of Don Quixote's influence on the Sot-Weed Factor. He said he would compare it to DQ because both are long books, yet entertaining reads. The second anon called him a moron for not realizing the obvious connections bewteen DQ and the Sot-Weed Factor. (You) are equally a moron for not grasping this.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I'm a different anon, but how dense are you? You're the one who missed the point, idiot. I'm revoking your posting privileges for a month.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Me? I am not moronic! You’re the moronic one here! I revoke your posting privileges, good sir
[...]
8 months ago
Anonymous
> the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy
This is the strangest one to me as they are on a literature board which has a history of interest in more literary works. These types of anons are more insidious than the obvious cancer threads tbh. It seems like more recently there has been a push to demoralize and dumb down the board, saying things like no one reads the classics but if they do, they only do for status, or something of the sort. You’ll also see a type of demoralizing when anons comment that a book isn’t read unless it is visibly damaged. I don’t understand the point of dumbing down the board, the demoralization posts, and spreading the belief that no one reads “the classics” or more intellectual books here
8 months ago
Anonymous
You're missing the forest for the trees, it's a much greater trend than what you describe in which the very notion of "caring", or having any sort of passion, standard to be upheld, or higher ideal is actively derided and shamed in every facet of society. Hence, what might be the the most common phrase of the current day >omg why do you care so much?
8 months ago
Anonymous
I think there is a difference when one goes on a special interest forum and criticizes said special interest with “why do you care?”, or “you can’t enjoy that, it’s just a pseud larp”
8 months ago
Anonymous
They're just insecure looking for someone to tell them it's ok that they don't "get it". Sad!
Yah I know. This Ebenezer Cooke guy, it’s funny how similar he is to the old Quixote. For those who aren’t in on any of the jokes, a big part of the comedy of the book is Ebenezer Cooke’s initial naivete (he’s a Candide-like figure) which slowly gets abraded and transformed into cynicism throughout the tale, leading up to him writing the “satyr”ical poem, “The Sot-Weed Factor; Or, a Voyage to Maryland. A Satyr,” a real poem by a real poet whom Barth based the novel on. A particular point of comedy is his sexual naivete and inexperience, with him refusing sex with several attractive women who offer it to him out of an old-fashioned Puritan-Christianesque mentality. He and the gang also get sodomized by pirates, in one funny chapter. I like it. Funny! Yes!! Haha!!!!
As another point of my rambling drunken monologues trying to somewhat bump up the quality of this board by mentioning a good book I’ve read (albeit many years ago, as a freshfaced naive young man not unlike Ebenezer himself, when I plowed through books quickly, simply for their reputation, and without necessarily having much retention of the books I’d read, due to my speed of reading and youthful lack of erudition and sophisticated vocabulary …) … one of the parts I liked most about it… was Barth’s somewhat anachronistic investigations of nihilism and existentialism, spoken about in the book in unmistakably yet subtly modern ways … similar to the use of anachronism (sometimes subtler, sometimes more obvious) in Pynchon’s M&D, about thorny questions about the objectivity of history, power structures in politics, drug use, religion, sexuality … anyway … I hope you get brutally murdered, Or you’re a great poster and these types of posts are more of what we need on IQfy and I love you and I screenshoted and saved this post out of admiration and affection for it and for you, or whatever I’m supposed to say… years of liberal drug, pot and alcohol abuse have rotted my brain to the point where I honestly forget the exactly perfect, astoundingly well-remembered details of books I read in late high school or early uni years, details that would astonish and impress others with my erudition if I remembered them … because that’s all books are about, is reading them and having something impressive to say to others about them — showing off your massive literary/philosophical wiener-size in how impressively, eloquently, and interestingly you can speak of them. Also, just so people don’t accuse me of being a “Reddit c*ck” or whatever for how flamboyantly and hammily I speak, FRICK israeliteS, FRICK Black folk AND FRICK TRANNIES or whatever I’m supposed to say. I am drunk as frick and also was drunk when writing the brief post you replied to. Watch Pepe wink when you open this gif. He’s holding a glass of golden champagne. And he’s a strangely beautiful character, if you’ve gotten used to him and formed a psychosocial parasocial bond to him.
Based slightly deranged drunk anon. Picaresque is always fun.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Excellent post
8 months ago
Anonymous
Fricking 10/10 post, excellent summation of the issues with this board. I love reading, but any actual discussion of material is nigh impossible on this board. It's almost a reddit-level circle jerk of pseudo intellectualism, along with IQfy, which is why I almost never post to either. People like to shit on IQfy but IQfy actually allows freedom of discussion, and has users willing to debate and take seriously arguments that would immiediately be disregarded on any other site, and new points of view and ideas can actually gain traction there (such as an unironic gain in appreciation for Devil May Cry 2). It's really a shame that the same level of discussion can't be found on this site's other boards, especially here where it should be most like that, yet is ironically one of the least.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I'm convinced that IQfy and IQfy are the most toxic boards. Yes even above /misc/. In both cases it comes down to LARP IQ-posting. Nowhere else is so obsessed with tearing posters down for the slightest sign of imperfection.
I like anon's flower analogy. This place ought to be a field of daisies, instead we have the dust smugly pointing out the lack of roses.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't agree with this, however. IQfy has its problems but it is by far and away the board with the greatest discussion element in my experience. Never seen a decent discussion on IQfy and but I haven't used that board or played video games in years.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Writing >I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote
does not constitute “actual discussion,” you dimwitted pseud
8 months ago
Anonymous
And neither does insulting someone for their ignorance, but when someone says >I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote
This gives you the opportunity to engage with this person in a constructive manner and perhaps they will learn something and further discussion will develop from this. Insulting them and putting on pseudointellecutal, pompous airs only serves to shut down the discussion and contributes nothing at all of value. It's simply a waste of space and discourages people from posting here.
A little gatekeeping is a good thing, but there's a difference between gatekeeping and being a tryhard little shitheel homosexual.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don’t think some anons realize how low the bar is here; simply making a comparison, elaborating on a theme or symbolism, or following the arc of a character, constitutes a some-effort post. This can be done in a few sentences or less. Besides, often discussion needs to bounce back and forth a few times before something good comes out of it. I’ve come to terms that I am a better replier than OP maker. I need something to go on or some food for thought to push myself more. What it comes down to for me is is an anon posting in good faith and putting at least a tad of effort in. That effort can take the shape of many forms and that thread end can be followed to potentially more lucrative grounds
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don’t think some anons realize how low the bar is here; simply making a comparison, elaborating on a theme or symbolism, or following the arc of a character, constitutes a some-effort post. This can be done in a few sentences or less. Besides, often discussion needs to bounce back and forth a few times before something good comes out of it. I’ve come to terms that I am a better replier than OP maker. I need something to go on or some food for thought to push myself more. What it comes down to for me is is an anon posting in good faith and putting at least a tad of effort in. That effort can take the shape of many forms and that thread end can be followed to potentially more lucrative grounds
lmao this is absolute midwit cope
8 months ago
Anonymous
I'm convinced that IQfy and IQfy are the most toxic boards. Yes even above /misc/. In both cases it comes down to LARP IQ-posting. Nowhere else is so obsessed with tearing posters down for the slightest sign of imperfection.
I like anon's flower analogy. This place ought to be a field of daisies, instead we have the dust smugly pointing out the lack of roses.
Books being synonymous with intellectualism is one of the worst things parts of this board and it leads to pseuds flocking here. I don’t use pseud to mean I am smarter than them, but I use pseud as one who cares about upholding appearances or an image. As has been said a lot of potential discourse grinds to a halt when the dick sizing starts. In my experience intelligent people are usually open minded and curious people. They are willing to listen to the thoughts and opinions of others and churn them over before coming to conclusions, but the conclusions are always susceptible to change. You mostly see hardline stances and refusal to engage honestly here because the idea of people wrong or changing an opinion is a major blow to the ego of one who thinks they above others here. The flip side is
> the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy
This is the strangest one to me as they are on a literature board which has a history of interest in more literary works. These types of anons are more insidious than the obvious cancer threads tbh. It seems like more recently there has been a push to demoralize and dumb down the board, saying things like no one reads the classics but if they do, they only do for status, or something of the sort. You’ll also see a type of demoralizing when anons comment that a book isn’t read unless it is visibly damaged. I don’t understand the point of dumbing down the board, the demoralization posts, and spreading the belief that no one reads “the classics” or more intellectual books here
which is really just an insecure way of maintaining the belief or image of intellectual superiority. Like a form of projection. One certainly cannot be honestly reading more perceived highbrow books is the thought of an anon who doesn’t read those perceived highbrow books, because that will mean anons have more perceived erudition, which would be a blow to the ego. The IQ obsessed anons are a strange phenomenon and definitely belong on another board as it mainly involves pattern recognition and problem solving. Everyone seems to be gifted going by the posted numbers posted here, but that clearly isn’t the case, as this board is moronic
TLDR: read books and discuss them in good faith. Don’t be an argumentative dick. Don’t try to knock others down to make yourself seem better. If you are so worried about your image on an anonymous website, you can do that by posting strong content, not dick sizing and kneecapping others
8 months ago
Anonymous
Nu-male post
8 months ago
Anonymous
This board is full of redditors and this thread is proof
You don't get how gatekeeping works and where it can be applied. Clearly the concept of gatekeeping itself needs to be gatekept from people who are incapable of discernment. Hint: there needs to be something worth gatekeeping, and the person doing it needs to be able to offer something of value. If the board wasn't complete shit, or if he had replied with some scintillatingly intelligent take in comparison to which the other post looked foolish, it wouldn't be a problem.
Another subtlety that escapes you because you are just posting out of knee-jerk aggression is the fact that the first post mentioning DQ was obviously not written by some clueless noob who needed to be harshly corrected, it was a decently well-read poster just making an offhand comment about the immediate reading experience, as proven by his later response. You don't get to be le epic hardcore 4chinz gatekeeper if you can't tell the difference between those two things.
>entire thread is midwits seething because >one anon compared SWF to DQ because both are long books he enjoyed reading >another sarcastically pointed out that SWF is heavily influenced by DQ >cue reddit levels of frothing at the mouth downvoting because the midwits who read SWF never realized the DQ connection
Barth is neither entry-level nor particularly popular on here, especially not since pomo has fallen out of favor. I highly doubt there are a bunch of people reading him who are unaware of DQ and the extreme similarity between two meta-Picaresque novels. I think it's just that homosexuals who engage in bad-faith uncharitable interpretation, of a sort which can be applied to any post that doesn't autistically overclarify every little point and explicitly pursue every possible tangent to its logical conclusion, are extremely unlikable.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Great post. But also, this:
> the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy
This is the strangest one to me as they are on a literature board which has a history of interest in more literary works. These types of anons are more insidious than the obvious cancer threads tbh. It seems like more recently there has been a push to demoralize and dumb down the board, saying things like no one reads the classics but if they do, they only do for status, or something of the sort. You’ll also see a type of demoralizing when anons comment that a book isn’t read unless it is visibly damaged. I don’t understand the point of dumbing down the board, the demoralization posts, and spreading the belief that no one reads “the classics” or more intellectual books here
8 months ago
Anonymous
Bro, you need to calm down and stop seething for being called out for being a superficially unread loser
8 months ago
Anonymous
you may be right, but one must remember: despite this being a literature board, it is still IQfy, which means on average the posts you engage with will be hyper-aggressive attempts to one-up other posters for a cheap ego boost. its the inherent nature of this website
Yah I know. This Ebenezer Cooke guy, it’s funny how similar he is to the old Quixote. For those who aren’t in on any of the jokes, a big part of the comedy of the book is Ebenezer Cooke’s initial naivete (he’s a Candide-like figure) which slowly gets abraded and transformed into cynicism throughout the tale, leading up to him writing the “satyr”ical poem, “The Sot-Weed Factor; Or, a Voyage to Maryland. A Satyr,” a real poem by a real poet whom Barth based the novel on. A particular point of comedy is his sexual naivete and inexperience, with him refusing sex with several attractive women who offer it to him out of an old-fashioned Puritan-Christianesque mentality. He and the gang also get sodomized by pirates, in one funny chapter. I like it. Funny! Yes!! Haha!!!!
As another point of my rambling drunken monologues trying to somewhat bump up the quality of this board by mentioning a good book I’ve read (albeit many years ago, as a freshfaced naive young man not unlike Ebenezer himself, when I plowed through books quickly, simply for their reputation, and without necessarily having much retention of the books I’d read, due to my speed of reading and youthful lack of erudition and sophisticated vocabulary …) … one of the parts I liked most about it… was Barth’s somewhat anachronistic investigations of nihilism and existentialism, spoken about in the book in unmistakably yet subtly modern ways … similar to the use of anachronism (sometimes subtler, sometimes more obvious) in Pynchon’s M&D, about thorny questions about the objectivity of history, power structures in politics, drug use, religion, sexuality … anyway … I hope you get brutally murdered, Or you’re a great poster and these types of posts are more of what we need on IQfy and I love you and I screenshoted and saved this post out of admiration and affection for it and for you, or whatever I’m supposed to say… years of liberal drug, pot and alcohol abuse have rotted my brain to the point where I honestly forget the exactly perfect, astoundingly well-remembered details of books I read in late high school or early uni years, details that would astonish and impress others with my erudition if I remembered them … because that’s all books are about, is reading them and having something impressive to say to others about them — showing off your massive literary/philosophical wiener-size in how impressively, eloquently, and interestingly you can speak of them. Also, just so people don’t accuse me of being a “Reddit c*ck” or whatever for how flamboyantly and hammily I speak, FRICK israeliteS, FRICK Black folk AND FRICK TRANNIES or whatever I’m supposed to say. I am drunk as frick and also was drunk when writing the brief post you replied to. Watch Pepe wink when you open this gif. He’s holding a glass of golden champagne. And he’s a strangely beautiful character, if you’ve gotten used to him and formed a psychosocial parasocial bond to him.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Great posts in general guys. I’m new to appreciating literature but I’ll check out this Mason and Dixie since Dostoyevsky has been a brick wall.
Where do you live I would like to speak with you. I can be anywhere in the world in ~November.
8 months ago
Anonymous
> Where do you live I would like to speak with you. I can be anywhere in the world in ~November.
I would be lying if I said I wasn’t flattered by this offer and perhaps even secretly a little turned on (at the fantasy of you as an attractive literate woman tracking me down, that is, since I’m not gay), but I’m afraid I don’t feel comfortable enough sharing this for security reasons, feds probably watch me and I don’t want to explicitly give out something that would clearly link this device to where I live.
I’ve never read Barth yet(I’m OP) but I read a Steiner essay where he absolutely destroyed one of his books, I think it was LETTERS, to the point I can never read that book without having the essay prejudice me
>rather underrated on this board compared to it
The marginally 'period' prose in M&D is wearing it in drag -- he outed himself in Against The Day and has gotten worse every offering. Imagine sending Barth a copy inscribed "Been there, done that." Insufferable horse faced buck-toothed fricking industry plant weasel.
>It’s a great book to pair with Mason & Dixon
I read M&D ages ago, then SWF a few years after that, and finally reread M&D this year. Sot-Weed was clearly an influence and they're pretty fun to compare. Not sure which I prefer.
Woah, what state are you in?
I saw a Giles Goat-Boy in a little public library inexplicably in ghetto-ass Hartford recently. Hope a homie actually reads it, it's even better than Factor.
>entire thread is midwits seething because >one anon compared SWF to DQ because both are long books he enjoyed reading >another sarcastically pointed out that SWF is heavily influenced by DQ >cue reddit levels of frothing at the mouth downvoting because the midwits who read SWF never realized the DQ connection
Yes, because instead of being a snarky dicksucker, the anon could have replied elaborating on the deeper relationship between DQ and The Sot Weed Factor. That way, the ignorant anon would have learned something and perhaps would have decided to reread the book. And what's more, further discussion may have developed in the thread instead of this mind numbing shitposting.
I recently got that from the little free library by my house. Maybe old John is trying to secure his legacy and leaving copies of his books anywhere he can.
Kek. I just feel like someone who reads Barth has a higher chance than average to have posted on IQfy
There is a fair chance it is forgotten book that has spent its allotted time in the lost and found already, this was most of the books in the library at the coffee shop I used to work at.
Probably not what you want but who knows, I have yet to read it.
Maybe a very slightly higher chance. IQfy has basic taste, almost everything talked about on here is well-known
I will find you, your wife, and your children and beat you all to death tonight
Kino book
Why are you lying?
No lie. I’ve never taken a book from there only got rid of books. I know Dalkey is releasing it in a couple weeks so I figured I’d sample it and buy it if I like it
Is this book actually a comfy Tom Jones type book or does it go up its own arse?
It’s a comfy book, Barth doesn’t get totally stuck up his own ass like in some of his more explicitly metafictional works. It’s a great book to pair with Mason & Dixon, and rather underrated on this board compared to it. It’s very fun, and very funny. I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote, where the length of the novel isn’t a drag but actually a joy to read.
>I'd compare it to Don Quixote
YA DONT SAY
WHO EVER WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THE SOT-WEED FACTOR AND DON QUIXOTE HAD CONNECTIONS?
Of all the moronic shit that gets posted on IQfy, this is probably my favorite genre.
>anon makes an unremarkable attempt at analyzing some aspect of a book
>statement is perhaps banal but shows actual effort and interest, which puts it above 95% of posts on the board (excl. pure philosophy/religion discussion) at any given time
>homosexual sees his chance to flex
>hurrrrrrr that's SO obvious, what a rube you are for pointing it out! ha ha!
>chilling effect on future attempts at analysis ensues
>not even over an actual fricking disagreement
If I had the choice between getting rid of, on the one hand, all the incel debates, the race debates, the troony debates, the communism debates, the peterson debates, the BAP debates, the religion debates, and the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy; and, on the other hand, you; I would choose you. Those morons just distract and take up space, you're the one actively stamping out the tiny bit of green growing in a barren wasteland, because it's a wild daisy and not a perfectly cultivated rose. What an utterly contemptible spirit it must take to make a post like that.
>completely misses the point
The first anon seemed to be blissfully unaware of Don Quixote's influence on the Sot-Weed Factor. He said he would compare it to DQ because both are long books, yet entertaining reads. The second anon called him a moron for not realizing the obvious connections bewteen DQ and the Sot-Weed Factor. (You) are equally a moron for not grasping this.
I'm a different anon, but how dense are you? You're the one who missed the point, idiot. I'm revoking your posting privileges for a month.
>Me? I am not moronic! You’re the moronic one here! I revoke your posting privileges, good sir
> the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy
This is the strangest one to me as they are on a literature board which has a history of interest in more literary works. These types of anons are more insidious than the obvious cancer threads tbh. It seems like more recently there has been a push to demoralize and dumb down the board, saying things like no one reads the classics but if they do, they only do for status, or something of the sort. You’ll also see a type of demoralizing when anons comment that a book isn’t read unless it is visibly damaged. I don’t understand the point of dumbing down the board, the demoralization posts, and spreading the belief that no one reads “the classics” or more intellectual books here
You're missing the forest for the trees, it's a much greater trend than what you describe in which the very notion of "caring", or having any sort of passion, standard to be upheld, or higher ideal is actively derided and shamed in every facet of society. Hence, what might be the the most common phrase of the current day
>omg why do you care so much?
I think there is a difference when one goes on a special interest forum and criticizes said special interest with “why do you care?”, or “you can’t enjoy that, it’s just a pseud larp”
They're just insecure looking for someone to tell them it's ok that they don't "get it". Sad!
Based slightly deranged drunk anon. Picaresque is always fun.
Excellent post
Fricking 10/10 post, excellent summation of the issues with this board. I love reading, but any actual discussion of material is nigh impossible on this board. It's almost a reddit-level circle jerk of pseudo intellectualism, along with IQfy, which is why I almost never post to either. People like to shit on IQfy but IQfy actually allows freedom of discussion, and has users willing to debate and take seriously arguments that would immiediately be disregarded on any other site, and new points of view and ideas can actually gain traction there (such as an unironic gain in appreciation for Devil May Cry 2). It's really a shame that the same level of discussion can't be found on this site's other boards, especially here where it should be most like that, yet is ironically one of the least.
I'm convinced that IQfy and IQfy are the most toxic boards. Yes even above /misc/. In both cases it comes down to LARP IQ-posting. Nowhere else is so obsessed with tearing posters down for the slightest sign of imperfection.
I like anon's flower analogy. This place ought to be a field of daisies, instead we have the dust smugly pointing out the lack of roses.
I don't agree with this, however. IQfy has its problems but it is by far and away the board with the greatest discussion element in my experience. Never seen a decent discussion on IQfy and but I haven't used that board or played video games in years.
Writing
>I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote
does not constitute “actual discussion,” you dimwitted pseud
And neither does insulting someone for their ignorance, but when someone says
>I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote
This gives you the opportunity to engage with this person in a constructive manner and perhaps they will learn something and further discussion will develop from this. Insulting them and putting on pseudointellecutal, pompous airs only serves to shut down the discussion and contributes nothing at all of value. It's simply a waste of space and discourages people from posting here.
A little gatekeeping is a good thing, but there's a difference between gatekeeping and being a tryhard little shitheel homosexual.
I don’t think some anons realize how low the bar is here; simply making a comparison, elaborating on a theme or symbolism, or following the arc of a character, constitutes a some-effort post. This can be done in a few sentences or less. Besides, often discussion needs to bounce back and forth a few times before something good comes out of it. I’ve come to terms that I am a better replier than OP maker. I need something to go on or some food for thought to push myself more. What it comes down to for me is is an anon posting in good faith and putting at least a tad of effort in. That effort can take the shape of many forms and that thread end can be followed to potentially more lucrative grounds
lmao this is absolute midwit cope
Books being synonymous with intellectualism is one of the worst things parts of this board and it leads to pseuds flocking here. I don’t use pseud to mean I am smarter than them, but I use pseud as one who cares about upholding appearances or an image. As has been said a lot of potential discourse grinds to a halt when the dick sizing starts. In my experience intelligent people are usually open minded and curious people. They are willing to listen to the thoughts and opinions of others and churn them over before coming to conclusions, but the conclusions are always susceptible to change. You mostly see hardline stances and refusal to engage honestly here because the idea of people wrong or changing an opinion is a major blow to the ego of one who thinks they above others here. The flip side is
which is really just an insecure way of maintaining the belief or image of intellectual superiority. Like a form of projection. One certainly cannot be honestly reading more perceived highbrow books is the thought of an anon who doesn’t read those perceived highbrow books, because that will mean anons have more perceived erudition, which would be a blow to the ego. The IQ obsessed anons are a strange phenomenon and definitely belong on another board as it mainly involves pattern recognition and problem solving. Everyone seems to be gifted going by the posted numbers posted here, but that clearly isn’t the case, as this board is moronic
TLDR: read books and discuss them in good faith. Don’t be an argumentative dick. Don’t try to knock others down to make yourself seem better. If you are so worried about your image on an anonymous website, you can do that by posting strong content, not dick sizing and kneecapping others
Nu-male post
You don't get how gatekeeping works and where it can be applied. Clearly the concept of gatekeeping itself needs to be gatekept from people who are incapable of discernment. Hint: there needs to be something worth gatekeeping, and the person doing it needs to be able to offer something of value. If the board wasn't complete shit, or if he had replied with some scintillatingly intelligent take in comparison to which the other post looked foolish, it wouldn't be a problem.
Another subtlety that escapes you because you are just posting out of knee-jerk aggression is the fact that the first post mentioning DQ was obviously not written by some clueless noob who needed to be harshly corrected, it was a decently well-read poster just making an offhand comment about the immediate reading experience, as proven by his later response. You don't get to be le epic hardcore 4chinz gatekeeper if you can't tell the difference between those two things.
Barth is neither entry-level nor particularly popular on here, especially not since pomo has fallen out of favor. I highly doubt there are a bunch of people reading him who are unaware of DQ and the extreme similarity between two meta-Picaresque novels. I think it's just that homosexuals who engage in bad-faith uncharitable interpretation, of a sort which can be applied to any post that doesn't autistically overclarify every little point and explicitly pursue every possible tangent to its logical conclusion, are extremely unlikable.
Great post. But also, this:
Bro, you need to calm down and stop seething for being called out for being a superficially unread loser
you may be right, but one must remember: despite this being a literature board, it is still IQfy, which means on average the posts you engage with will be hyper-aggressive attempts to one-up other posters for a cheap ego boost. its the inherent nature of this website
Yah I know. This Ebenezer Cooke guy, it’s funny how similar he is to the old Quixote. For those who aren’t in on any of the jokes, a big part of the comedy of the book is Ebenezer Cooke’s initial naivete (he’s a Candide-like figure) which slowly gets abraded and transformed into cynicism throughout the tale, leading up to him writing the “satyr”ical poem, “The Sot-Weed Factor; Or, a Voyage to Maryland. A Satyr,” a real poem by a real poet whom Barth based the novel on. A particular point of comedy is his sexual naivete and inexperience, with him refusing sex with several attractive women who offer it to him out of an old-fashioned Puritan-Christianesque mentality. He and the gang also get sodomized by pirates, in one funny chapter. I like it. Funny! Yes!! Haha!!!!
As another point of my rambling drunken monologues trying to somewhat bump up the quality of this board by mentioning a good book I’ve read (albeit many years ago, as a freshfaced naive young man not unlike Ebenezer himself, when I plowed through books quickly, simply for their reputation, and without necessarily having much retention of the books I’d read, due to my speed of reading and youthful lack of erudition and sophisticated vocabulary …) … one of the parts I liked most about it… was Barth’s somewhat anachronistic investigations of nihilism and existentialism, spoken about in the book in unmistakably yet subtly modern ways … similar to the use of anachronism (sometimes subtler, sometimes more obvious) in Pynchon’s M&D, about thorny questions about the objectivity of history, power structures in politics, drug use, religion, sexuality … anyway … I hope you get brutally murdered, Or you’re a great poster and these types of posts are more of what we need on IQfy and I love you and I screenshoted and saved this post out of admiration and affection for it and for you, or whatever I’m supposed to say… years of liberal drug, pot and alcohol abuse have rotted my brain to the point where I honestly forget the exactly perfect, astoundingly well-remembered details of books I read in late high school or early uni years, details that would astonish and impress others with my erudition if I remembered them … because that’s all books are about, is reading them and having something impressive to say to others about them — showing off your massive literary/philosophical wiener-size in how impressively, eloquently, and interestingly you can speak of them. Also, just so people don’t accuse me of being a “Reddit c*ck” or whatever for how flamboyantly and hammily I speak, FRICK israeliteS, FRICK Black folk AND FRICK TRANNIES or whatever I’m supposed to say. I am drunk as frick and also was drunk when writing the brief post you replied to. Watch Pepe wink when you open this gif. He’s holding a glass of golden champagne. And he’s a strangely beautiful character, if you’ve gotten used to him and formed a psychosocial parasocial bond to him.
Great posts in general guys. I’m new to appreciating literature but I’ll check out this Mason and Dixie since Dostoyevsky has been a brick wall.
Where do you live I would like to speak with you. I can be anywhere in the world in ~November.
> Where do you live I would like to speak with you. I can be anywhere in the world in ~November.
I would be lying if I said I wasn’t flattered by this offer and perhaps even secretly a little turned on (at the fantasy of you as an attractive literate woman tracking me down, that is, since I’m not gay), but I’m afraid I don’t feel comfortable enough sharing this for security reasons, feds probably watch me and I don’t want to explicitly give out something that would clearly link this device to where I live.
I’ve never read Barth yet(I’m OP) but I read a Steiner essay where he absolutely destroyed one of his books, I think it was LETTERS, to the point I can never read that book without having the essay prejudice me
>rather underrated on this board compared to it
The marginally 'period' prose in M&D is wearing it in drag -- he outed himself in Against The Day and has gotten worse every offering. Imagine sending Barth a copy inscribed "Been there, done that." Insufferable horse faced buck-toothed fricking industry plant weasel.
>It’s a great book to pair with Mason & Dixon
I read M&D ages ago, then SWF a few years after that, and finally reread M&D this year. Sot-Weed was clearly an influence and they're pretty fun to compare. Not sure which I prefer.
I saw a Giles Goat-Boy in a little public library inexplicably in ghetto-ass Hartford recently. Hope a homie actually reads it, it's even better than Factor.
i put my copy of confessions of a mask in the one my mom made right across the street from the middleschool.
Woah, what state are you in?
i read this book because i've seen some anons say it is better than mason and dixon, and they were right.
This board is full of redditors and this thread is proof
citation needed
Considering I found the Arno Schmidt pseud’s reddit account should be more than enough
>entire thread is midwits seething because
>one anon compared SWF to DQ because both are long books he enjoyed reading
>another sarcastically pointed out that SWF is heavily influenced by DQ
>cue reddit levels of frothing at the mouth downvoting because the midwits who read SWF never realized the DQ connection
Yes, because instead of being a snarky dicksucker, the anon could have replied elaborating on the deeper relationship between DQ and The Sot Weed Factor. That way, the ignorant anon would have learned something and perhaps would have decided to reread the book. And what's more, further discussion may have developed in the thread instead of this mind numbing shitposting.