Culture How 4chan became the home of the elite reader - The left is losing its grip on the literary realm.

1736176930903.png

It’s a Friday in early January and someone on 4chan has invented a new philosophical doctrine: “esoteric Kantianism”. “You must not take Kant’s words at face value,” the anonymous user warns – readers who do so will only take away shallow insights about the half-blind “normie mind”. “You must read between the lines.”

A reading revolution is taking place on this notorious message board, most famous for alt-right memes, anything-goes chatter, and large-scale coordinated pranks (several hoax bomb threats organised by the site have led to arrests and mass evacuations). Users operate under total anonymity and are subject to bare-bones moderation. Most of the ideological avenues offered in /pol/, its politics forum, would leave you estranged from polite society and banned from any conventional social media.

And yet, a new secret generation of autodidacts – frustrated with the state of modern academia and the dilution of the traditional canon – are turning to the website as an unlikely home for literary ambition. Britain’s working class used to shelter a legion of autodidacts, too: set on self-improvement, they staged Shakespeare productions and read classic literature without input from local authorities or red-brick academics. Later, in mid-century America, door-to-door salesmen shilled 54-book sets of Mortimer Adler’s Great Books of the Western World to people who wanted a classical education. This impulse hasn’t gone away. It has migrated to /lit/.

The members of /lit/, 4chan’s literary subforum, love Dostoyevsky, Joyce and Nabokov. They abhor the gatekeepers of traditional publishing and the moral pieties that beset academia in the 2010s. They’ve created their own recommendation ecosystem in the form of homemade charts, huge Jpegs which serve as visual reading guides. “Start with the Greeks,” the most famous one says, leading beginners through an annotated flowchart from modern mythological retellings to Homer and then, eventually, Aristotle. This advice is dished out to wannabe autodidacts on /lit/ so often that it has become a meme. (“I will not start with the Greeks,” says a gun-toting civilian in one image, as soldiers surround his house and order him to read Plato.)

Gen Z might be going to university at record rates. But the transformational ideals on 4chan find no equal in the English-speaking academy. And so an instinct once associated with leftish institutions like universities is migrating into the purview of the very-online right. 4chan is becoming a natural home for the ambitious reader.

Take the Atlantic article last year that revealed students at America’s most elite institutions no longer have the stamina or fluency needed to read entire novels for class. Literature classes in American schools are gradually exchanging “whole books” for short, analysable extracts, which provide a close model of the sort of reading involved in standardised testing. At the university level, lecturers are adjusting their syllabuses in turn to suit those who don’t or can’t read for long periods: one Melville specialist at Columbia has stopped teaching undergraduates Moby-Dick (voted /lit/’s favourite book in 2023). And similar omissions are filtering into the real-world intelligentsia: the editor of the New York Times’ book review section recently admitted on a podcast that he had not read George Eliot’s Middlemarch (fine, perhaps, for a normal person, but not for a literary editor at the New York Times).

When the Atlantic article was reposted on /lit/, the board’s denizens – between angry segues about mass immigration and chemsex (as is to be expected on 4chan) – seemed to agree with its claims. “I must be the only 22 year old on the planet who goes to my college library to find books by John Ruskin,” one wrote. “These are follow up indoctrination thinking schools [sic],” another said of modern universities. 4chan’s book ecosystem, with its focus on the traditional canon, seems to provide a refuge for those disillusioned by the bare-bones treatment of literature in the English-speaking academy. One user attests that English lit in 2025 “is taught basically as a technique or a social-civic tool rather than anything approximating an art”.

The inhabitants of /lit/ see themselves as the victim of anti-canon efforts, as the academy has sought to “decolonise” and expand the curriculum over the past decade. And /lit/’s reaction is hardly unreasonable: there’s a difference between great books (well-written, perhaps undiscovered) and Great Books, which stay in the accepted canon because they have had an outsized influence on influential writers. It isn’t testable and it doesn’t contribute to any sort of transferable skill – but there is revelatory joy in following a thread from one work to the next, watching as previously hidden details reveal themselves in spoken language and in popular culture.

This experience is unavailable in 2025’s version of academia, but it can be found online – on dodgy message boards and in pirated PDFs. All sorts of students hunger for great literature, but autodidact culture seems to move from one political pole to another based on the infrastructure available. In Britain, Victorian “mutual improvement societies” and 20th-century labour colleges either leaned to the left or were openly associated with communist groups. This side can blame itself for the modern political proclivities of /lit/: humanities academia shifted in the 1960s to accommodate the revolutionary likes of Foucault and Freire, but its current bar to entry – tens of thousands of pounds, plus years on a low doctoral wage – keeps any remaining benefits out of reach to the large majority. And leftists have been slow to produce any mainstream criticism of Big Tech companies, which pushed us into an accelerated state of post-literacy after making a commodity and business out of attention.

But there will always be people who want a long, consequential view of the humanities, regardless of their financial circumstances or previous educational background. This time, the online right has provided the intellectual scaffolding and infrastructure.

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2025/01/how-4chan-became-the-home-of-the-elite-reader (Archive)
 
As a proud heretic, I consider the great European philosophers of the post-renaissance to be more relevant. Adam Smith and Thomas Hobbes are the two I suggest starting with. The ancient Greek philosophers are quite divorced from modern conditions and political systems, Platonic ideals don't hold up in practice.

20th century propaganda novels are also quite fun. Be it Sinclair or Steinbeck, they're excellent textbooks on emotional argument styles and how to manipulate the masses through carefully constructed narratives. Read them and then go read the news. You'll realize that journalism is foundationally propaganda and not an informative service.
 
It makes sense that people who want to have serious discussions about heavyweight literature would want to do it without the stifling presence of wokefags who would inevitably bog everything down with their faggot pet issues.
Or being told your opinions or thoughts are somehow invalid because of whatever identity group they project onto you.
On the internet no one knows you're a dog.

Nothing could demonize reading worse than the lefts current attempts to exalt reading as an identity,
As @wtfNeedSignUp already mentioned, this is basically "Booktok"
 
only funny thing i know about lit is that one time they drove an autistic girl off youtube with their coom baiting.

book-girl.png
That what happens when you replace literature with fap bait for women. The entire media pretty much dies out besides autists who read old stuff.
i dont read fantasy stuff, but i did talk to a woman a while back who is into it and she was complaining that almost all modern light fantasy novels are just fap bait. just another reason why i prefer to stick to old novels, the classics, russian realism, and older scifi stuff.
 
And yet, a new secret generation of autodidacts – frustrated with the state of modern academia and the dilution of the traditional canon – are turning to the website as an unlikely home for literary ambition. Britain’s working class used to shelter a legion of autodidacts, too: set on self-improvement, they staged Shakespeare productions and read classic literature without input from local authorities or red-brick academics.

This is the most telling thing about the whole article. The assumption that everyone participating in it on 4chan is an uneducated working class moron. The lumpenprotetarian. Because nobody who rejects the current state of "literature" or the opinions of academia could possibly be educated.

Literature classes in American schools are gradually exchanging “whole books” for short, analysable extracts,

That has become necessary because the "new books" that has pushed out the great books are just about unreadable and their content is loathed even by the people who endlessly force students to read them. Its more efficient to simply extract the short political message which students are supposed to internalize and present them with that.
 
the editor of the New York Times’ book review section recently admitted on a podcast that he had not read George Eliot’s Middlemarch
I thought he stopped a bit shy of admitting it -
There are some great classics that I’ve never read. And I will not admit to on this podcast for fear of embarrassment. But there are the George Eliot’s and the other authors of that sort that I will say like, alright, now’s the time I have to read House of Mirth or whatever it is.
but it turns out that they're referencing a different podcast, where he's talking about how few of the New York Times' "100 Best Books of the 21st Century" he's read;
You can feel badly about this or you can say, oh my god, look at all these amazing books I wanna read. But I did not. I'm looking at my tally right now which I'm a 100% not gonna tell you what the number is and it's embarrassing. I'm the editor of the New York Times book review. I should have read more books on our list than this. But what I wanna say is you can still be a reader who reads widely and curiously and not have read many books on this list. Right? Like Yeah. I mean, look, I I bring up all the time I still have not read Middlemarch by George Eliot, but I have read, I don't know, The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay by Michael Chabon. Right?
and he's also seemingly mentioned it on other podcasts. It's like he's bragging about not having read Middlemarch. I'd almost have a small degree of sympathy if the crux of his argument was that he was always reading for work, but it would still raise the question how he got to be a literary editor - he's not even doing that, because he's not read many of the books the NYT was recommending!


This "spooky season" video he made is like something off of BookTok, so I guess they're trying to attract a Gen Z audience.
i dont read fantasy stuff, but i did talk to a woman a while back who is into it and she was complaining that almost all modern light fantasy novels are just fap bait.
I think that's just a genre problem with light fantasy. It's a low stakes "cosy" read which means it leaves loads of space for relationships as the main plot device (so attracts the smut crowd) and it's typically more of a low fantasy setting with worlds quite similar to our own but with fantasy creatures (so attracts the werewolf smut crowd). Historical romance dipped in popularity so the bodice ripper authors had to migrate somewhere. I'm sure a lot of the remainder that top recommendations are something like "two lesbian witches run the village tea shop, but when a stranger comes to town, they must use the power of friendship to save the day and prove that transgender witches should be allowed into the local coven".
It's the bane of the glut of self published books, which is why actual book recommendations should be sought from elsewhere to BookTok (but apparently not the NYT).
 
You should start with the Greeks. At least the Illiad, Odyssey, and The Histories by Herodotus. Then you can move onto more esoteric stuff like Xenophon.
That infographic is pretty bad. Apollonius of Rhodes, Vergil, Sophocles, Euripides, Ovid, and Seneca should be on there for more advanced mythological and poetic background. Xenophon, Arrian, and Plutarch are good for basic historical works. And very advanced readers can move onto Catullus, Propertius, Sappho, Archilochus, Vergil’s Eclogues and Georgics, Plautus, Terence, and Menander for mythology and poetry; Polybius, Diodorus Siculus, Pliny, Josephus, and Tacitus for history.

Hesiod and the Greek fragment Loeb text are not as worthwhile because they’re not going to be of general interest in comparison. Plato is necessary but it’s a hard sell in comparison to the great plays and histories. You’ll get more as a lay person from Sophocles and Plutarch than you will from Plato and Aristotle. And there’s a lot less homosexuality in the poetry and histories.
 
Back