What makes great writers so abnormal?

What makes great writers so abnormal?

Why do rarely hear about a successful writer who is generally a calm, compassionate, humble, normal person?

Attached: DOSTEOSVKY.png (1600x2000, 2.9M)

Broken people write literature, sane people write genre fiction.

Attached: DFBED290-B66B-4792-A9D3-7AEA6B2F8E47.jpg (591x378, 40K)

Everyone is fucked up, it’s just the great writers who we turn a microscope on and find evidence for exactly how and in what ways they were fucked up.

Writing is not humble. An author believes that their thoughts are valuable enough for others to read, unless you're ghostwriting or pushing potboiler.

Because writing gives you an opportunity to think and reflect before speaking, and usually if you think more than talk, you're dull and boring, and you should go to that quiet corner that no one can have "fun" in.

Usually, people who are bubbly and normal can just vent to others that will listen to them, and they will have strong communication skills. They don't need to write to share anything. Not saying all people are like that...just saying.

Cope

delet this

"All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

applying that to the individual can help to see why the history of art is rife with abnormality. what is there to be said in art of a normativity that takes itself for granted versus the infinite range of subverting that normativity? society already is imposing norms that perpetuate it and I don't think it's art's role to merely reinforce/reproduce that on a surface level. the greeks flocked to theatre for the spectacle of tragedy and the history of art followed suit, in terms of the nature of the works in the canon

The normie feels no need to talk about these problems. For them these problems are elsewhere. Bringing up such a topic in normie circles makes them feel as if they are witnessing some strange magic that is not for them. There is, of course, a glimmer inside their brains somewhere which reflects the fact that they too posses such thoughts, but why bother with something so far away and so "unrealistic"? Whatever they posses (an overly balanced mind???) + being constantly in normie circles which trains this behaviour further allows them to have this naturalistic attitude.

You have a bunch of literary critics who say that the ramblings of a disturbed mind are "great literature". After they drop the Bomb and the human race digs itself out of the rubble I am willing to leave just about all modern lit in the ruins. Jane Austen, Alfred Loyd Tennyson, Charles Dickens and Mark Twain I would keep...the rest of 19th century lit I would mostly forget. In 20th century lit I would keep
Vonnegut - especially Player Piano , and CS Lewis and Tolkien, but nihilistic and atheist literature I would keep out...Salinger, Hunter S. Thompson and nearly all the modern authors that lit likes I would just leave in the ruins as well...

You would leave Dostoevsky and Tolstoy in the ruins?

No I was mostly talking about English literature which is why I thought of also saving them (I would) but didn't mention them....

The scene that sticks in my mind from Catcher in the Rye is Caulfield being bummed out at the Christmas show put on at Radio City Music Hall by the Rockettes..."you could just tell they wanted out of there and just wanted a smoke"...ok ..they were tired at the end of the day and are only human and this is a job...but they put on a great show nevertheless and the audience loved it and they are professionals so the show must go on....really ..get a life Holden...too bad they didn't have modern anti-depressants in the 50's.. .this teenager needed them..

Maybe that is a twisted image of writers, maybe not. Writing is just not good for your health. Haruki Murakami strays far from the tortured genius type, as he is very sociable and likes to run marathons, he seems quite at peace I think and he stopped smoking many years ago.

You would keep Kurt Vonnegut but not Shakespeare. Nice!

>a successful writer who is generally a calm, compassionate, humble, normal person?
Murakami

>tfw I just read his short story
Holy shit what a pathetic cuck lmao

The brothers karamazov, now THAT was a novel *sips*

Attached: 1547897410896.png (378x370, 120K)

What?

You heard me asshole

Wops, forget to write the name. I read White Nights.

>Jane Austen

I am talking about modern literature...
Gibbon in his H. Dec Fall R Empire talks about the destruction of the library of. Alexandria and the loss of 99 % of the literature of the ancient world. He laments the same things we do today, loss of important Greek plays, books by Livy and Tacitus and Varro, etc. But he goes on to say "that we still have books the Ancient World thought were Treasures - the Illiad and the Odyssey...." and goes on to suggest that nearly all the ancient world's literature was almost certainly junk....
I can just imagine 500 or so years from now the literature professors talking about most 20th and 21st century lit and saying that "the sickness of the times was manifested in their literature...no hope...no meaning...pointless lives...no wonder their atheisic and nihilistic civilization ended up disappearing in a thermonuclear holocaust...."

Antidepressants should be illegal, they're the mental equivalent of diet pills for fat people.

Iliad*

not true at all

Who is Chekhov? Tolstoy wished he could be as great a man as him.

Those who are happy do not observe, those that claim both cannot be. For what reason does one have to observe critically when there is no reason to do so? Why question when all of one's queries have been answered? The un-elated ask why, the elated ask why not.

Based schizoid post!

You honestly dont sound like you read very much.

>he would leave Hegel to the ruins
My göt, absolute mouth breather

It's Atheisic literature...it really just says the same thing..."God is dead ...Life has no meaning...when you die there is no afterlife...there is no real standard of right and wrong. ." Just restated a bit differently by different authors - that atheism is really the only message in just about all modern literature there is...

Hegel can stay where he is...Plato and Stoics are the only good philosophers....

How is it a cope?