He raped his wife

Attached: Stoner.png (675x1080, 579K)

You know what fiction is, right? You know it's not real.

>Marital rape actually exists!

Attached: Face (Avatar).jpg (400x400, 23K)

Kys degenerate faggot.

t. plebbit

Fuck Walker

The grad student didn't know anything, it's not like Stoner went out of his way to unjustly flunk him. Walker only got as far as he did due to his kinship with Lomax. Also that part where Stoner grills Walker in front of the panel was some of the funniest shit I've ever read, 10/10.

>Also that part where Stoner grills Walker in front of the panel was some of the funniest shit I've ever read, 10/10.
that was my favorite part. absolutely kino.

can you answer?

No, you don't understand. Edith was a monster who most definitely had BPD and tried to hurt Stoner using their daughter as leverage. Subhuman trash

He stabbed his wife

Attached: mloo.jpg (1200x1200, 225K)

>hey, I enjoy rape. Ruining someone’s academic career is far more evil
Wtf? You best be joking
May you remain untouched

May your mother remain untouched, bitch lmao

what a braindead comment

it goes with the tripfag's braindead response

I agree with you, but you just ruined this thread.

>thinks rape is good
>calls others 'degenerate'
absolutely cannot make this shit up

literally never said rape was good, or bad, for that matter

The humanities aren't about reciting dry facts, it's more about something akin to Walker's spirited genius. It wasn't just nepotism, even Stoner admitted that his work was original and valuable. He was just butthurt because Walker was more talented than him and that he got bee tee eff oh'd at that one seminar. He used his one medicum of power over people to red tape brilliance. Edith and Stoner deserved each other. Both made each other miserable, both were fucking retards. Walker, however, didn't deserve that shit.

"Marital rape" didn't exist as a concept in the west until the 1970's or so, and still doesn't exist in much of the world today. You can obviously ASSAULT your wife, but marriage creates what is called "sexual privity," or the idea of intimate partnership, which excludes "rape" properly defined. Rape is the unlawful sexual taking of another, which simply isn't possible between two individuals in a union of sexual privity. The concept cheapens the idea of marriage itself, which is reflected in the historical divorce statistics. And I say this as a leftist/Marixist. There was no "marital rape" in the USSR, Mao's China, Fidel's Cuba, etc. The idea is neoliberal at its core, designed to create a society of atomised economic units rather than individuals within a coherent society.

you can't "rape" your wife.

As consensus reached in a previous thread:
1. It is impossible to rape your wife.
2. Consent is for moderns.

The rape question is like the least important/interesting part of the book. William and Edith were terrible to each other. It's not a dick waving contest. Could we discuss something more interesting, like how he found peace in the end, how his decision to not join the war influenced him and stunted his growth as a man, the pivotal moment at the start where he chooses to switch majors?

based shitskin

He raped Holden Caulfield's sister, Phoebe

>entry level book topic dies once the meme topic has exhausted itself.
The absolute state of the Yea Forums literature board

But it was his wife right?

Attached: 1490143731800.jpg (607x608, 55K)

How exactly does one rape their wife? That's an oxymoron. Your wife is literally your property and you are hers.

She was sexually abused by her father

so she was used to surprise dicking and thus able to deal with it.

>The humanities aren't about reciting dry facts
I agree with you but I think some of the questions Stoner was asking were fairly simple like "Name a famous book from X period" which I think is fair game. The fact that Walker struggled to answer such simple questions means that he hasn't even read a good chunk of the material. It's possible that he was a genius but it doesn't matter because he was too lazy to fulfill his potential. Even when he takes the seminar with Stoner, he bullshits the assignment and then refuses to show Stoner his paper. If he actually put forth the minimum amount of effort that was required of him then all of this nasty business could've been avoided. As it stands, he was only really a shallow imitator of Lomax' genius. The hints of genius were really just shallow allusions to something that was not truly there, an attempt to capture Lomax' energy while failing to take hold of the knowledge that makes his energy so enigmatic. Whenever Walker was given a chance to shine on his own, to prove himself as a genius in his own right, he floundered.

>prove as a genius in his own right, he floundered
That was not my impression. His polemics against Stoner in the seminar were described as fairly intelligent AFAIK. He wasn't an idiot, just didn't have time for the bullshit of dry academics. Maybe I can just relate, as my literary interests were squashed by big bad institutions pushing gay ass stuff I didn't give a shit about, but Stoner WAS acting petty, that much is difficult to argue against

I haven't read the book in a while but I think Stoner was initially wowed by Walker's rhetorical ability at the start of his speech but then he realized that it lacked substance and he was just bullshitting as it went on. Could be wrong. He definitely wasn't stupid though, you're right. And on Stoner being petty, I don't think he was all that petty desu. Academia is something that Stoner holds sacred and he has literally devoted his life to it at the cost of all else. He gave up his parents, the farm and abandoned his entire mode of living to pursue it because the pull was so strong. When he sees someone like Walker, who Stoner deems to be a fraud, trying to make his way into the academic world through charisma and rhetoric without the knowledge to back it up he has to act and preserve the sanctity of the academic institution. He doesn't want an unknowledgeable person to go around teaching students. It was a little personally motivated since Walker irked him/Lomax was playing favorites but I don't think it was full petty. I think it would go into the realm of pettiness if Walker managed to answer the questions and Stoner still refused to admit him or if he kept looking for errors where there were none to be found. From what I remember Stoner doesn't let his personal biases get in the way of acknowledging the genius of others. Lomax for example really fucked Stoner up but he always viewed him as a genius in the realm of academics despite their personal feud. If Walker could prove himself like Lomax did then Stoner wouldn't have done anything.

I think Masters discussed how rejects find a home in academia, how it is a shelter. Do you think he would've judged Stoner for pulling that bullshit? I'd say yes. Stoner doesn't approve of Walker's way of operating, he is passionate just like Stoner was. My reading of Stoner also makes out the initial pull to literature a mistake similar (but less harsh) to proposing to Edith. He didn't know who he was, and he was exposed to the intensity of the humanities and quite frankly was drawn like a moth would. But as we can see from his life, he did not internalize the lessons in literature. He did not apply it to his life. He was an academic, thoroughly, to the bone. And there's nothing wrong with that, as Masters' conception of the university would suggest. But denying a young man, who also struggled in society a place among them for not having the same methodology is his worst crime. It is telling that his punishment for the attempted denial of Walker's passion is the destruction of his affair, the one thing that made him feel truly fulfilled.

Also, when discussing stuff like "was Walker a pseud" one must remember that it's a deeply intimate book, one that's fully immersed in Stoner's subjectivity and bias.

The Masters angle is interesting. I think I'd have to agree with you in that regard. Stoner always admired Masters for this sort of ephemeral free-flowing quality that he had about him and I can see how Walker might also have a similar nature. Despite his great love for Masters, Stoner never quite understood him, often times it feels as if he remembers little of the original Dave Masters and instead projects this idealized image of him that grows and changes along with Stoner. The Dave Masters that Stoner fondly remembers in the second half of the book is different from the Dave Masters he actually knew in reality. It's definitely possible that Stoner failed to pick up on the similarities between Walker and Masters.

God I wish I were David Masters

You wish you were dead?

that's literally not possible you dumbass

>The humanities aren't about reciting dry facts, it's more about something akin to Walker's spirited genius.
So you should be awarded an English PhD and be placed in a position to teach without knowing anything about the field, right?

>he got bee tee eff oh'd at that one seminar
Did we read the same book? More like Walker BTFO'd himself and everybody cringed.

>It wasn't just nepotism, even Stoner admitted that his work was original and valuable.
Would it have been valuable if it weren't for Lomax's extensive guidance?

>He used his one medicum of power over people to red tape brilliance.
You're just a lazy cunt who wants a handout. Fuck off.

HE DESERVED IT YOU MORON GO BACK AND READ THE BOOK AGAIN AND DONT SHOW YOUR DUMB UGLY FACE AROUND HERE NO MORE

These were some of my favorite parts of the book, but it's clear that William wasn't very "self-aware" at the time, and it shows through the writing. The lens into William's mind is very unclear, but not because of poor writing.

She deserved worse.

Didn't she have a primal hunger for his dick when she wanted a child? When did he rape her? Was it explicit? Can't recall

you're wrong and shouldn't try to justify how wrong you are about the book by using personal anecdotes. the truth of the matter is walker had no idea what the hell he was talking about and i suspect his early recitations was perhaps heavily guided/influenced by lomax with little contribution by himself.

see pic related. stoner asked him a very simple question regarding his own specialisation and he couldn't even answer that. that is just blatant ignorance and someone like that shouldn't be allowed to teach in any institution for that matter.

Attached: dumbass.png (1235x485, 92K)

>Didn't she have a primal hunger for his dick when she wanted a child? When did he rape her? Was it explicit? Can't recall

>...sometimes at night in her sleep, she unknowingly moved against him. And sometimes, then, his resolve and knowledge crumbled before his love, and he moved upon her. If she was sufficiently roused from her sleep she tensed and stiffened, turning her head sideways in a familiar gesture and burying it in her pillow, enduring violation; at such times Stoner performed his love as quickly as he could, hating himself for his haste and regretting his passion. Less frequently she remained half numbed by sleep; then she was passive, and she murmured drowsily, whether in protest or surprise he did not know. He came to look forward to these rare and unpredictable moments, for in that sleep-drugged acquiescence he could pretend to himself that he found a kind of response.
um... that's rape.

oh btw that wasn't a trick question at all, i had to google and confirm that english bards and scottish reviewers were in fact by byron. he didn't even know that. the fact stoner needn't continue was an obvious sign of how dumb walker is.

oya, ty

Attached: Abandon_Thread_snail.gif (278x166, 2.02M)

This is a regular thread and yet nobody mentions her attempts to sire his child and the voracity with which she regularly dragged him into bed. No, she did not have Stockholm's syndrome. In fact, it baffles me that people can even discuss this all while blissfully ignoring the rigid social code she upheld on her own will, that of the heiress of a wealthy family, and how she played the expected role to the tee. They don't mention that, no, but they also don't mention that in high society until about the 50's marriage was still seen as a tool to unite families for prosperity more than love. Why do you think she seems so hesitant to marry him until her parents (off page) force it upon her to some degree, probably by appealing to her lifestyle and obligations in relation to it. The stereotype of marriage to a wealthy bride is that of a cold, distant marriage. This is what they had, so uninspired, inert sex is to be expected. Call it rape if you want, but she did follow up later with months of baby making practically against Stoner's will, though no man would object to that, especially after a sex starved honeymoon and infrequent forays into her alien sheets

youre all retarded

edith was molested/fucked by her dad thats why she was so protective of their daughter and hated sex. reread the chapter where her father dies and how shes basically happy about it

>wanting to justify a character's personality 'quirks' to the point of being delusional & nit picking & stringing along random arbitrary events

9-1-1 - plane - muhammed - obama bin laden - hitting

Wasn't rape, or was it? I would have done the same, without feeling bad at all.

Lol, ‘I’m a genius but the man kept me down! I’m just like Walker, my potential cut short by the powers that be!’

Edith was a spiteful and vindictive bitch who didn’t deserve Stoner. He was pure and she corrupted him. FUCK EDITH.

Thank u

based trips