>white men, try not to ruin literature challenge Impossible
>trying to format twitter bait on 4chudanon...
>>24955335>Goodreads is XOkay grampa
From Wikipedia:>"Robinson Crusoe[a] (/ˈkruːsoʊ/ KROO-soh) is an English adventure novel by Daniel Defoe, first published on 25 April 1719. It is often credited as marking the beginning of realistic fiction as a literary genre..."Just absolutely fuck Shakespeare and verisimilitude and everything from the medieval canon to the Greek playwrights.
>>24955337>Goodreads is XThis but unironically
>>24955350The Greeks and Shakespeare absolutely did not try to write plays wherein people spoke as they do in reality
>>24955334Don't care show me the tits or gtfo
>>24955353They absolutely did and I'm tired of pretending they didn't. The Greeks spoke like Greeks, the English spoke like English, the Danes spoke like Danes, and Titus Andronicus spake like a fucking Roman. Maybe you don't want people to be well spoken because it cracks your sleazecore narrative of how demotic people are supposed to act and then you would have to realize that you're simply not up to snuff. Examine yourself.
>>24955353Then how did Shakespeare's audience understand all the neologisms and stuff? If he came out of nowhere talking like a stilted, stuffy ancient, that would have been confusing as fuck.
>>24955362We have surviving copies of the equivalent of ESL textbooks from the 1500s. They record plenty of examples of normal speech, and no, it does not sound like the fiction being written at the time. You're idealizing the past by conflating it with the heightened reality of fiction.
>>24955385He wrote in verse, that doesn't mean he used archaic language but he did use very poetic language as well as crass. Greek tragedy was also in verse and intended to be poetic
>>24955334based astute woman.
Aren't you tired of identity politics? There's so much to life.
>>24955361Way to prove her point
>>24955397>He wrote in verseYou're confusing meter for diction. Those are two entirely unrelated things. If anything, the opposite is true. We get many our of quirky idioms and words from the English speakers of that time because Shakespeare introduced them in his plays and cemented them.Nobody thinks people speak in rhyme and meter retard. Holy shit. Can't believe that had to be said.
>>24955447No one thinks people speak in poetry, no. Hence it isn't considered realist and isn't intended to be
>>24955439there's really no point to be proven. if OP cannot upload her mammaries to the interwebs, we are done here.
imagine my cock all the way down this bitches throat
>>24955362>and Titus Andronicus spake like a fucking Roman. In english?
>>24955458That's not at all what verisimilitude means, and since Shakespeare's rhyme and meter were deployed to popular audiences, it means that they were familiar with verbal flourishes. The fact they didn't speak entirely in them is irrelevant to all of the things we're discussing. You are an idiot.
>>24955465If you translate it, then yes.
>>24955470People did not speak like Shakespeare in everyday life, no. Maybe if you actually read Robinson Crusoe you would have an idea how spoke everyday in the 1600's, because that's a significant part of how the novel distinguishes itself
>>24955334It gets worsehttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2932.Robinson_Crusoe>Anyway, it turns out not to be his footprint at all, it actually belongs to the "savages" (Carribean Indians) who apparently visit the island sometimes in order to cook and eat their prisoners, which, for the record, was not actually a common practice among Indians in the Americas. And here's the part where you really hate white people. He then saves one of the prisoners from being eaten and makes him into his slave, who he renames "Friday," teaches English, and converts to Christianity. Friday, instead of kicking this pompous jerk's posterior from here to next Friday after repaying whatever debt he owed Robinson for saving his life, is a faithful slave in every way for the remainder of the book.
Such a silly thing to argue about when you could just set them side by side. Now, which of these would you describe as 'realistic fiction'?>LEAR, [rising] Never, Regan.>She hath abated me of half my train,>Looked black upon me, struck me with her tongue>Most serpentlike upon the very heart.>All the stored vengeances of heaven fall>On her ingrateful top! Strike her young bones,>You taking airs, with lameness!>CORNWALL Fie, sir, fie!>LEAR >You nimble lightnings, dart your blinding flames>Into her scornful eyes! Infect her beauty,>You fen-sucked fogs drawn by the powerful sun>To fall and blister!>REGAN >O, the blest gods! So will you wish on me>When the rash mood is on.vs.>My Raft was now strong enough to bear any reasonable Weight; my next Care was what to load it with, and how to preserve what I laid upon it from the Surf of the Sea; But I was not long considering this, I first laid all the Plank or Boards upon it that I could get, and having consider’d well what I most wanted, I first got three of the Seamens Chests, which I had broken open and empty’d, and lower’d them down upon my Raft; the first of these I fill’d with Provision, viz. Bread, Rice, three Dutch Cheeses, five Pieces of dry’d Goat’s Flesh, which we liv’d much upon, and a little Remainder of European Corn which had been laid by for some Fowls which we brought to Sea with us, but the Fowls were kill’d; there had been some Barly and Wheat together, but, to my great Disappointment, I found afterwards that the Rats had eaten or spoil’d it all; as for Liquors, I found several Cases of Bottles belonging to our Skipper, in which were some Cordial Waters, and in all about five or six Gallons of Rack, these I stow’d by themselves, there being no need to put them into the Chest, nor no room for them. While I was doing this, I found the Tyde began to flow, tho’ very calm, and I had the Mortification to see my Coat, Shirt, and Wast-coat which I had left on Shore upon the Sand, swim away; as for my Breeches which were only Linnen and open knee’d, I swam on board in them and my Stockings: However this put me upon rummaging for Clothes, of which I found enough, but took no more than I wanted for present use, for I had other things which my Eye was more upon, as first Tools to work with on Shore, and it was after long searching that I found out the Carpenter’s Chest, which was indeed a very useful Prize to me, and much more valuable than a Ship Loading of Gold would have been at that time; I got it down to my Raft, even whole as it was, without losing time to look into it, for I knew in general what it contain’d.
>>24955478>All this while the storm encreas’d, and the sea, which I had never been upon before, went very high, tho’ nothing like what I have seen many times since; no, nor like what I saw a few days after: But it was enough to affect me then, who was but a young sailor, and had never known any thing of the matter. I expected every wave would have swallowed us up, and that every time the ship fell down, as I thought, in the trough or hollow of the sea, we should never rise more; and in this agony of mind, I made many vows and resolutions, that if it would please God here to spare my life this one voyage, if ever I got once my foot upon dry land again, I would go directly home to my father, and never set it into a ship again while I liv’d; that I would take his advice, and never run my self into such miseries as these any more. This, as you can see, is nothing like Shakespeare. It aims to imitate everyday conversation
>>24955478You're arguing against rhyme and meter, not diction or realism of substance. I'm not sure why you're not getting this. You may not be teachable.
>>24955334What is her problem?
>>24955482Do you honestly think people spoke this way conversationally?>Looked black upon me, struck me with her tongue>Most serpentlike upon the very heart.>All the stored vengeances of heaven fall>On her ingrateful top! Strike her young bones,>You taking airs, with lameness!
>>24955486People did not use long metaphors or literary syntax or poetic similies in real life, let alone at the abundance of Shakespeare, unless they were quoting the Bible or were the upper class writing a literary letter or quoting literature, or giving a speech in parliament or something
>>24955496Not me, no.
>>24955492kekie libtard meltie libtard meltie
>>24955501Then it's not "realism". In fact realism in playwriting didn't emerge until centuries later, mostly ignited by Chekhov 's plays. Shakespeare does not in any way try to imitate the way people actually talk, except when he writes prose and that's generally in a comic context
>>24955508Well yes, of course. I agree with you. I'm not this anon >>24955350.
>>24955516Oh, my bad
>>24955519
>>24955499>People did not use long metaphors or literary syntaxThey definitively did, and there are still medieval letters proving this. >or poeticsThis is all you're really arguing. Nobody was talking about rhyming as the basis of genre. The original claim, if you remember, is that realism as a genre supposedly came from the 1700s, which is pure unadulterated nonsense.
>>24955334I think it's kind of funny how before minecraft existed there were minecraft books like this. And the craziest part is they were hugely successful, just like minecraft. Makes me wonder what other premises will be a billion dollar game idea.
>>24955496No. But they corresponded this way. Like the difference between texting and conversation today. Today people text to show how braindead and lazy they are with abbreviations and nigger slang. Well back then they wanted to show off their wealth of knowledge in correspondence. It was a form of entertainment, getting letters from your cousin or whoever. So yeah, they were kind of flamboyant in the way they immitated popular stories.
>>24955523Most people in the Middle Ages were illiterate, even the nobility. Widespread literacy only started with the Reformation emphasis on each individual being obligated to read the Bibil. So letters from the Middle Ages would tend to reflect a very erudite demographic. Furthernevermore letters were nearly always more formal than regular conversation--even to this day. Now if you want to argue that people spoke very poetically at the upper echelons, that was because they were vastly better read, probably better read than almost any non academic today, because most they read was poetry, and because expectations among the upper class were extremely formal and that formality extended to speech. But even then, poetic speech was almost always about quoting or alluding to literature, not about coining your own. The latter would be reserved for rhetoric
>>24955531Letters are much longer and took a longer time to arrive so of course they do not correspond to texts anymore than posts here
>>24955482We went through this again in television and movies. Original Star Trek used a theatrical vocabulary. In the late 90s like in DS9 they were doing "realistic fiction" and that's been standard since.The symbolic vocabulary for theatre develops separately from common language but common people participate, children raised on puppet shows with roots in Greek Satyr plays grow up to hang out in pubs where bard types sing songs with roots from the Germanic wandering poets.
>>24955556>only started with the Reformation emphasis on each individual being obligated to read the BibilYou have Greeks in the late classical and Byzantine period complaining that people know Plato and Euripedes but don't quote Matthew. I'll pull up my old papers on this, but there was a case in the 13th century where two lords were feuding and one lord was upset because propaganda pamphlets were being circulated by his female servants. The implication is that his female house servants were fully literate.
>>24955556>Furthernevermore letters were nearly always more formal than regular conversation--even to this day.You have no evidence of this one way or the other, you're using modern examples to propose this for the former periods, but this isn't even true. People write electronic messages to each other with elided speech, incorrect or spurious terms (often nonsensical), or just literal emojis. If anything, the conclusion would be that post-modern literacy must be worse than medieval literacy, if proofs be compared.
>>24955585People do not have to laboriously write each one striving to keep their penmanship pretty and dipping in an inkwellMonks doodles emojis in their writing all the timeYou think terms were standardized in the Middle Ages? In Latin writing maybe they were close to it, but surely not outside of that
>>24955492>Melissa That's my sister's name and she's a librarian
>>24955334She’s right it’s a shit book. Basically prosperity gospel but in olden times.
>>24955702How? The money the guy made wasn't by praying. The only prosperity connected to prayer was finding seeds and shit
>>24955492>if Biden didn't run for reelection Kamala would've wonWeird cope.
>>24955729You’re illiterate lol. I guess your brain has been destroyed by being online all the time. Many such cases.
>>24955334>female troll with smug troll expression in profile pic successfully upsets 4channice.game respects game.I will leave a negative review at the feminist bespoke cupcake place in reply.
>>24955764>le media literacyThe fact that he becomes religious is completely realistic because is lonely as fuck. His investments that make him wealthy were all done before he even gave a damn about religion. Once he gets off the island and supposedly becomes a devoted protestant he literally pretends to be a Catholic and goes to Catholic mass and donates money to Catholic monks in order to fake his beliefs. When Friday finds a hole in the plot of his beliefs and asks about it, he pretends not to hear him because he doesn't know. There is no particular religious moral to the book, there is nothing supernatural in it and Crusoe actually lets his religious fancies get the better of him and terrify him into thinking a footprint is the devil's and he lives in fear of this for a long time before being more rational. Your issue seems to be just that the character is a Christian and quite realistically turns to prayer after years of isolation and nothing to read but the Bible
>>24955350Why do you need Wikipedia to discover Robinson Crusoe? This is /lit/, everyone here has read Robinson Crusoe here, as well as Moll Flanders, Roxane, and Captain Singleton.
>>24955524Entire video game genres are derivative of Robinson Crusoe. It is deeply deeply embedded in the Anglosphere (and beyond) psyche. You can not read a more English book that lays out the English mindset and worldview.
>>24955702No it isn't you stupid child.
>>24955808He becomes guided by providence. He examines his conscience and aligns his own will with God's plan and will.>Thy will be done, on Earth as it is in HeavenIt's a Protestant theology of reconciling free will with divine providence: to become a productive and enterprising instrument of the Holy Spirit. The Protestant work ethic of later fame.
>>24955334>>24955479This woman spat a colossal TRVTH NVKE though
What's the point of the wolf chapter? Just a cool idea Defoe wanted to shoehorn in at the end? It reads like a disjointed second season TV show script.
>>24955479Friday is the Anglo liberal view of race relations. The White liberal's task to uplift the savages of the world, who are fellow creatures created in the image of God, decent, eager to learn and follow and become civilised compatriots in the work of the world. Nothing has changed since Defoe wrote it.
>>24955945The wolf stuff at the end is key to Crusoe's spiritual redemption.
>>24955967And how exactly? He's already redeemed himself several times over by then. It seems like a teaser for the Further Adventures of Robinson Crusoe and that Defoe is the inventor of the sequel genre too, although I haven't read it to properly comment.Why does Friday want to pull a magic trick with the wolves (or is it a bear? I forget) in the woods, and why does Defoe make a big scene of his antics? It's quite odd.
>>24955917Even video game wolf attacks>>24955945
>>24955954>Nothing has changed since Defoe wrote it.That's true, including the savages of the world.
>>24955927I mean, he doesn't even know anything about protestant theology but most likely he leans toward Calvinism judging toward his beliefs in religious tolerance. The bigger issue here is that you are offended by the character being religious in a highly religious era and seeing things through a religious lens, which is totally realistic and itself is treated in a realist manner such as him being unable to answer basic questions about Christianity and panicking thinking the devil is out to get him (which is explicitly proved as silly) and feigning being a Catholic to get along when Protestants for the most part saw Papists as heathensAnyway yeah the thing about Calvinism (which is where the protestant work ethic came from) it's monergist, they reject synergy or the doctrine that human freedom works in concert with divine will. They believed that God already chose who would be saved before he created them, and that if you do works and are religious it simply signifies you are chosen. If you weren't then you wouldn't do good.
>>24955954But that isn't true since Crusoe is very troubled at the natives being ignorant of the gospel and not knowing any better but then he supposed God has a reason for it. He saves Friday by massacring his captors about to eat him. Friday is naturally extremely grateful and loves him for it, which is a natural human emotion
>>24955945The point is why Crusoe gets over his fear of the sea, since he initially thought God didn't want him on. But after the wolves he says fuck that
>>24955334who does she want to kill? white men?
