Need a hot feminist take need a hot feminist take. Oh I know
“A woman could never write Finnegans Wake or Ulysses”
I totally get the criticism that the current canon is too white, male, and heteronormative, it objectively is, and opening up the canon to new voices is a good thing. This person doesn’t even seem to want to do that though. It’s just flatly dismissing difficult to read books, which is just lazy. Unsurprisingly this person writes adult romance novels, you get this garbage from a ton of twitter authors who either write very horny books or young adult fiction, and seem to aggressively refuse to read literature.
Hell, she might have a good point if she had asked, do current expansions of the canon miss important works because while they accept the easy to read novels by women, and other marginalized groups, there’s still a bias against difficult to read and experimental works by those groups.
Yep. It’s the “Bernie wearing mittens is male privilege” school of feminism, and it’s really fucking stupid.
The types to bitch about classic literature on twitter also like to tweet about how some potboiler YA bullshit made them cry and how sex scenes make them uncomfortable, just utterly Barney Brained “adults”
Idk if being uncomfortable with sex scenes in media makes someone barney brained or less of an adult. I’d be perfectly happy to never have to see or read one again, being a non-horny person, and they do actively make me uncomfortable. You’re dead on about the YA brain poison, though.
Movies fucking suck now because they are incapable of portraying people having actual emotions and relationships. The end of sex scenes is a part of that
Please support me in my efforts to not have to see awkwardly shot and drawn out scenes of heterosexuals fucking every time I want to watch a tv show or movie.
Nothing against the chapo hosts but this is one of the culture takes they make that you have to take with a grain of salt, male-gazey box-checking badly shot sex scenes and their accompanying shoehorned hetero relationship plots were not crucial to good movies, they were mostly just weird. They also weren’t a part of movies, many many excellent movies, for a long time before they became ubiquitous during the ‘especially creepy rapist producer’ Hollywood era. Not that they aren’t necessary and great in lots of films, just not most that they were a thing in. We also don’t need a return to the stock scene where prepubescent boys peeped on undressing teen girls, as much as Will Menaker may like that, as an example. More realistic attitudes towards sexuality in movies doesn’t mean more sex or nudity, my favorite sex in movies is of the embarassing and uncomfortable sort, or sexual repression and feeling being represented by a lack of sex or even masturbation (sadly underexamined in cinema).
Now, squibs and practical effects in general? Absolute must, parrot the podcast by all means on that
Felix was right that there’s an entire subculture now that wants all media to just be Barney
Or talk about the difference between a hat and a snake that has swallowed an elephant.
Anglos just assume anything related to Ireland is inherently nonsense, thus making Joyce completely incomprehensible to them.
Also, Ulysses is an eminently readable book, like it’s very dense which means you have to read it a couple times and read commentary/annotations, but that’s something every great work of literature requires. They teach you this in HS English. Finnigan Wake I could take or leave, but Ulysses is a genuine masterpiece.
Was thinking might try it someday, just because I’ve heard so much about it over the years. Is there a particular annotated edition you think is good?
I have Don Gifford’s ‘Ulysses Annotated’ which is comprehensive but almost as long as Ulysses itself.
Another option you might want to try is the Ulysses lecture series that the Great Courses produced, its cheap/free to listen to on Audible. The professor give a 1 to 2 hour lecture on each chapter, going through the events, giving background and some light commentary.
Is it better do you think to read the notes beforehand so I know what I’m getting into, or afterwards to contextualize what I read? Or maybe both? Probably both is best for me lol.
It’d be a separate volume, but Don Gifford’s Ulysses Annotated. Or you could go another route and read Anthony Burgess’s Re-Joyce, which attempts to make the case that annotations are unnecessary.
I think I’d rather go with the annotated, just because like if I get to the end of the book about why we don’t need annotations then I could have just read Ulysses without annotations in that time, and if I disagree at the end then I have to read the annotations anyway. :galaxy-brain:
Damn, the annotations book is 700 pages long? And that doesn’t include Ulysses? That’s intimidating damn.
Just dislike something and complain about it like a normal person instead of making it a political statement, that goes for you fucks reading this that make hot take threads about how Skyrim is reactionary just shut up shut the fuck up post some Todd Howard meme instead and just dislike Skyrim.
Yes lol I notice it tons lately everywhere. For some reason people are mildly annoyed by something and they make up a weird political metanarrative about it.
i thought like this too but then i went back to play skyrmi as if the character was really me. Got to the point where I had to side with the imperialists or the racists and ended up quitting.
I’m pretty sure you can just not do those quests, either way this still falls under “I dont like game”.
I can’t play Skyrim like the character is me because I wouldn’t do anything. I’d start farming.
ah shiiit a dragon wiped out your farm and your favourite goat. Better go wipe out his entire bloodline.
the real question is what’s up with the person taking a “grad class devoted to Ulysses” who’s mad that it has a lot of of scholarship devoted to it. Like, how do you begin to get a graduate level education in literature if you find the idea of obsessively studying literature laughable? what are you even getting a degree for?
Actually maddening. The fact a book took a century to be fully understood by scholars should be appealing to you if you’re doing a graduate degree in literature.
