Over 20

>over 20
>still hasn't written any masterpieces

What's taking so long, user?

Attached: Rimbaud.png (220x290, 50K)

I'm 22 and maybe has too, though it's not complete yet.

Most people at 20 haven't lived or read enough to write "masterpieces.'

most poets are finished by 23

>poems
>masterpieces
pick one

Examples? Besides Rimbaud?

keats

Ehem, ever heard of: Baudelaire, Dante, Mallarmé, Spenser, García Lorca, Quevedo, anyone of worth? Were they really finished at 23? They were just starting. Sure you can cherrypick but saying "most poets were finished at 23" is simply not true.

>Write masterpiece, magnum opus otherwise your best work by early 20s
>years later and you cant even compare to it no matter how hard you try you can't catch up to your younger self
>die as a one hit wonder with other works that only bitch autists will read

LMAO

Attached: 1522694854732.jpg (125x106, 2K)

Stop it, you'll make Rimbaud cry

robert graves said it. and a lot of poets don't become famous you know.
anyway out of all those i'd only rate baudelaire as a real poet

someone said artists do their best work in their 20s and 80s

>robert graves said it
A nonentity compared to Dante.
>and a lot of poets don't become famous you know.
We're talking about real and actually published poets here, though. Not "poets", known by no one.
>anyway out of all those i'd only rate baudelaire as a real poet
Dante and Quevedo not real poets? Are you kidding?

>tfw 20
There’s still time . . .

Attached: EFD13134-2D8D-4658-9E53-C94B60120AAE.jpg (429x400, 74K)

>A nonentity compared to Dante.
(by your leave) i don't agree
>Not "poets", known by no one.
i don't see why the hell not.

>i don't see why the hell not
Because literature is ultimately what survives. Not some faggot's good intentions.

Tick-tock user

poetry is poetry. whether it survives or not is a bit of luck. remember shakespeare's sonnets were never published until the recipient sold them to a publisher after will's death

i remember some article, i just tried to find it but no luck. it used a certain age as a benchmark (i want to say 25), and basically said that poets/writers before this age have the passion of youth behind their masterpieces, while the older folks' masterpieces are often stylistically experimental as a result of how much time they've had to learn the ins and outs of language. of course, i could be completely misremembering, or the article could have been complete horseshit.

i already have written several short masterworks desu

>anyway out of all those i'd only rate baudelaire as a real poet
are you retarded? Do you even read poetry, pseud?

I regard literature as a dead artform. Everything there was to write, is already written. For me it means that creating any additional pieces of literature would be an act of unethical, detrimental, and redundant dilution of the craft. Until humanity achieves the next evolutionary leap by the means of transcendence, singularity, or what have you, people should cease writing. Finitude seems to scare a lot of people, but I prefer to look at it as completeness.

>completeness
no such thing, pseud.

I'm too tired and too heavily medicated.

why would i say that if i didn't read poetry

let's see

No one has written about me fucking your mother, write about that