[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/lit/ - Literature


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: wake.jpg (1.22 MB, 1994x1529)
1.22 MB JPG
Which is more impressive to have read?
>>
>>25513090
Hegel because there's a higher chance you're someone interested in the subject matter and have made an effort to wrap your head around what it's saying. Meanwhile 99% people just 'read' Finnegans Wake as a joke and then read the Finnegans Wake Skeleton Key and pretend they've understood it.
>>
>>25513097
Finnegans Wake isn't saying anything, rather it enables you to say everything
>>
One is a mirror the other a brick and it's flying towards your head
>>
you cant be serious
>>
>>25513090
>Meanwhile 99% people just 'read' Finnegans Wake as a joke
90% of people who read Hegel are leftist troons that do it so they can post about it on bluesky
>>
you only need one phd to understand hegel. to understand FW you need dozens.
>>
>>25513923
You dont need to understand finnegans wake
>>
>>25513930
i agree, but it's much more impressive to understand that book than any other, if im interpreting OP's question accurately
>>
>>25513090
If you claim to have “read” FW I’m going to assume, likely correctly, that you’re just a performative twat who wants people to be stunned at how smart he is. Thus, reading it actually has the opposite of its intended effect
>>
Finnegan's Wake by far, just for that killer opening line:
>Begin again, Finnegan
>>
>>25514230
It is much worse to condemn someone for having read a book than to boast about having done the work
>>
>>25514260
No it isn’t
>>
>>25514303
Justify why inactive criticism is better than boastful activity, or remain silent
>>
>>25513923
What is FW about?
>>
>>25513933
Does anybody understand it at all? I thought its like everyone has their take on what it MIGHT be about, but nobody knows for sure.
>>
>>25513090
Reading a book isn't impressive OP.
They are just a collection of words written by someone.
>>
>>25514315
You’re the one who claimed the reverse was true first. Burden’s on you.
>>
>>25515800
i have walked through good chunks of books with minimal broad context of understanding so this is correct to me
>>
I want to slap anybody who claims to enjoy FW. Oh get it, there's a church called Adam and Eve, and the river does run from here to there, and there IS actually Vico road, and recirculation ties back to Vico but it's also a toilet being flushed, get it, ah ah! It's so smart because it's one sentence but IT MEANS multiple things ah ah! it's not just references for the sake of references this shit is actually NIGHT-SPEAK, get it, because hurr durr when you sleep you don't make sense, ah ah!
No. Fuck you.
>>
>>25513090
I don't know if its impressive to read any book. You'd have to write an essay on them demonstrating understanding before I'd be impressed.
>>
>>25515857
Reading a book can be admirable even if academic-level understanding isn't obtained
>>
That don't impress me much.
>>
>>25513090

Unpopular opinion but I see Hegel being used more for performative flexes than Finnegan’s Wake out in the wild. Especially people who have read no other philosopher or classic lit for that matter.
>>
>>25516843
How many people have you actually met who have read either
>>
>>25516849

3 to Hegel. 1 to FW.
>>
>>25516855
Rather small sample size on which to base general statements wouldn't you say
>>
I haven't read Finnegans Wake but it sounds like the idea is that its supposed to be like the experience/atmosphere of a dream and how it all kind of blurs together when you're in that unconscious state or something
>>25516843
Because Hegel's philosophy is referenced a lot in political discussions and it was influential on Marx specifically
>>
>>25517067
you skimmed a wikipedia summary of finnegans wake but you are not prepared for what actually lies in it
>>
>>25514230
The word Performative is not a descriptive adjective. It does not describe a personality type and your loose usage of it should be condemned
>>
>>25515857
What if I got arrested right when I figured out how to read Finnegans Wake and didn't have time to write a dissertation about my discovery just to impress you?
>>
>>25516843
hegel is name dropped to give standard political takes faux gravitas
>>
Marco is name dropped to give standard culinary takes foie gras
>>
What clashes here of wills gen wonts, oystrygods gaggin fi shygods! Brékkek Kékkek Kékkek Kékkek! Kóax Kóax Kóax! Ualu
Ualu Ualu! Quaouauh! Where the Baddelaries partisans are still
out to mathmaster Malachus Micgranes and the Verdons catapelting the camibalistics out of the Whoyteboyce of Hoodie
Head. Assiegates and boomeringstroms. Sod’s brood, be me fear!
Sanglorians, save! Arms apeal with larms, appalling. Killykillkilly: a toll, a toll. What chance cuddleys, what cashels aired
and ventilated! What bidimetoloves sinduced by what tegotetabsolvers! What true feeling for their’s hayair with what strawng
voice of false jiccup! O here here how hoth sprowled met the
duskt the father of fornicationists but, (O my shining stars and
body!) how hath fanespanned most high heaven the skysign of
soft advertisement! But waz iz? Iseut? Ere were sewers? Th e oaks
of ald now they lie in peat yet elms leap where askes lay. Phall if
you but will, rise you must: and none so soon either shall the
pharce for the nunce come to a setdown secular phoenish.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.