ITT: Books that people read just to feel smart

Philosophers are pretty much all shit writers. You read it because it gives you something to think about, not so much because the book is "fun". If you think Derrida is "fun" you're probably fucking excruciating to talk to.
The translation of a work affects its readability as well. Seamus Heaney's Beowulf and the New International Version of the Bible are accessible to many people but they aren't terribly accurate so scholars use other translations because enjoyment isn't their primary goal.

Derrida is notoriously difficult to translate into English, so it's likely that reading his work is less of a chore if French is your native language.
 
I'm surprised Ayn Rand gets mentioned so much. When I was in college, all of the fart sniffers I knew thought her work was trash. They would have laughed at anyone who took her seriously, but I suppose this depends a lot on whether your social circle is right or left leaning.

Lisa Simpson used to be a good guide on what someone who wants to appear smart would namedrop, but no one pays attention to The Simpsons anymore.

I used to read dating profiles for entertainment and usually people would list whatever they read in high school. Toni Morrison was a frequent guest on women's profiles.

When I was in college, Thomas Pynchon, David Foster Wallace, and anyone known as a "magical realist" (i.e. Gabriel Garcia Marquez) were all authors for aspiring fart sniffers. A few memoirs like Elizabeth Wurtzel's Prozac Nation and Augusten Burrough's Dry fit the bill, too, though I think the scandal behind James Frey's A Million Little Pieces killed off the memoir trend by the late 2000s.

Reese Witherspoon has supplanted Oprah as the book club tastemaker for women who want to appear smart.
 
The Greeks.
Or any big philosopher that gets quoted/cited a lot.

I dunno about you guys, but when I ask for someone's opinion I'd like to listen to their opinion, not Nietzsche's.
It gets more annoying when they read only one philosopher and keep parroting them.

E.g.
I know this is a couple years old, but fuck it. I go to a Catholic church on a college campus and it is really annoying to hear "Aquinas says X" or "Aristotle says Y" from the wannabe theologians or philosophers there because I am almost certain they haven't read the actual texts super deeply. They probably googled the opinion of Aristotle and just went with it. I even hear some guy say that he doesn't know if evolution is true due to Aristotle's theory of the forms not being easily applicable to it (which it really is if you consider the actual genetic content of the animal into the equation but I digress). It shows very little independent thought and an overeliance on someone else's opinion. Mind I do respect the work of both Aristotle and Aquinas and think they are mostly right, but at the same time, I disagree with some more minor points of theirs which frankly are demonstrablt wrong. All in all, you can tell the difference between someone that engages with the text and someone that just memorizes by the questions they ask regarding it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: std::string
Ursula Le Guin is probably the dumbest person to ever write a novel in history. How can anyone think she was good at anything besides having connected parents?
Also a Stellaris patch that overcomplicated the economic side of the game for years was named after her.

In the original Shadows Over Innsmouth story there's a lot of talk about racially impure people etc, if i remember correctly he attributes the fish people's ugly faces to them probably being inbred foreigners. Then there's the story with the german in the submarine one which I recall had some talk of Aryan superiority. It's generally not big stuff or even stuff I care about. Lovecraft being racist doesn't bother me, but he was definitely racist.
The German in the submarine was a WW1-derived Prussian officer stereotype, similar to straw Nazis that show up in 20th century movies. Lovecraft was a massive Anglophile and so fell for their propaganda easily. To be fair to Lovecraft, this was back in the day when Britain was the greatest country on Earth (or at least a solid contender) ,not the pretentious Blairite police state that we mock today, and if we believe H.L. Mencken the American press uncritically parroted the British press for all news from abroad.

Oh good, we're doing Alan Moore.

Put me down in the list that thinks Watchmen is overrated. It's got a decent examination of several broken people as they stumble their way through costumed vigilantism, with a couple of good twists, but has it's head way too far up it's own ass for it's own good. Too much moany nihilism, which is the main thing that annoys me about Doctor Manhattan's 'superior detached perception', and meandering nonsense. Say what you like about Zach Snyder, but he was 100% right to cut that Black Freighter shit, and a lot of other crap, out of the film.
I read somewhere once that the big splash panel where Veight/Ozymandias clobbers the would-be assassin is the exact centre of the story, and after that, the second half is a mirror image of the first in some way. Panel structure, I think. At first I thought 'ooo, that's clever', but then I wondered why? Why is it clever? Who's going to notice? What difference does it make to the story? It's a hipster in-joke that only gets pointed out to the plebs so we can be in awe of what a galaxy-brain the writer is.

It's been said before, but Watchmen is only notable because most capeshit before it was as deep as a puddle. Most capeshit after it is as deep as a puddle too, but with an added veneer of Moorian pretentiousness.

The nihilism and even a strong streak of proto-SJWism - political correctness? - grates in some of his other work too. Killing Joke. Swamp Thing. Swamp Thing was one of the first Alan Moore comics I read and I still look kindly on it, but parts of it are hard to stomach at this point. One issue that stands out in my mind is the woman who turns into a werewolf and kills herself because she's got PMT, because her husband is a male and slightly annoying, and because supermarkets and tupperware are marketed to women.

<snip>
On the theme of sci-fi writers, HG Wells. I don't know if he counts as an author of 'books people read to look smart' but he's a little overrated in my view. He gets credit for early genre-defining stories like War Of The Worlds or The Time Machine - and rightly so - but there's a streak of communist rhetoric through most of his work, which is more noticeable in some, and you can't unsee it in his more popular pieces once you're aware of it, or read a little about his personal life. I sat down with an omnibus of his complete works and had to stop partway through the semiautobiographical In The Days Of The Comet, before I even got to the 'sci' part. It was just his self-insert railing about the government, the upper classes, the church, his mother, the girl who wouldn't go out with him, the landowners son she did go out with, everything he could think of. A complete joke of a story.
Makes me wonder how many creatives are overrated for ideological reasons. Charlie Chaplin is a hipster darling while Buster Keaton is only remembered by a handful of boomers and contrarians, even though they had roughly equal fame in their own era. Probably because Chaplin was an open socialist while Keaton stayed out of politics.
 
Last edited:
Makes me wonder how many creatives are overrated for ideological reasons. Charlie Chaplin is a hipster darling while Buster Keaton is only remembered by a handful of boomers and contrarians, even though they had roughly equal fame in their own era. Probably because Chaplin was an open socialist while Keaton stayed out of politics.
I haven't bothered watching much silent film, but "The Kid" still effectively tugged at my heartstrings and I think that's largely due to Jackie Coogan' delivering one of the most adorable kid performances. When he jumps into Chaplin's arms at the very end it's just a perfect encapsulation of how it feels to be Dad. It's funny that he then grew up to be Uncle Fester.

In all sincerity I find the concept charming that there are millennials and even zoomers who are far more interested in silent film than I am. I really can't understate how much more I prefer Marx Brothers, Three Stooges, and post-silent era Laurel and Hardy for being talkies.
 
I haven't bothered watching much silent film, but "The Kid" still effectively tugged at my heartstrings and I think that's largely due to Jackie Coogan' delivering one of the most adorable kid performances. When he jumps into Chaplin's arms at the very end it's just a perfect encapsulation of how it feels to be Dad. It's funny that he then grew up to be Uncle Fester.

In all sincerity I find the concept charming that there are millennials and even zoomers who are far more interested in silent film than I am. I really can't understate how much more I prefer Marx Brothers, Three Stooges, and post-silent era Laurel and Hardy for being talkies.
Keystone Kops master race
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Ged! and Kulee Baba
I knew this tool who'd prattle about Dostoevsky books but hadn't ever seemed to read anything lately and had a rather small vocabulary for a reader. He liked to throw the word "pretentious" around at other people.
Dostoevsky uses the word "pretentious" the same way Peter Griffin uses "shallow and pedantic." But that's only because his works are shallow and pedantic.
 
2afc2b83678b48c72c97a372bc829335-why_your_five_year_old.gif

I saw this in a bookshop a few years ago. It feels like a neat little combination of pseud slop providing soundbytes why the emperors new clothes really are there, and butthurt that the plebs aren't falling for the bullshit.
 
Everyone reads Sun Tzu's The Art of War thinking they will learn a glut of deep esoteric knowledge that all the world leaders knew by heart when a majority of the advice goes something like:

Remember to feed your troops, or they will starve. That would be bad for combat

Do not battle in the mud, it is very unstrategic

Every sixty seconds on the battlefield, a minute passes.
 

Ayn Rand apologists have the most ludicrous case of "doublethink" I've ever come across in my entire time on the internet.

They will flat-out acknowledge that John Galt's monologue that goes on for 90 some-odd pages about morality is tedious. They will acknowledge that you'd be better off reading the Wikipedia article about Objectivism. Hell, they will even say that Ayn Rand was more of a political writer than a fiction writer. But they will still insist that you must read the entirety of Atlas Shrugged from cover to cover, and that it's definitively not rubbish because of its impact on Western culture or something.

Also, daily reminder that Ayn Rand spent her entire life idolising the wealthy and stigmatising the destitute, only to end up relying on the very same welfare state she decried so fervently in her old age.
1677605409520.png
 
Anything by Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Gogol, Gira, DFW, Marx, or Pynchon. Scratch any man who claims to be a fan of Japanese or Russian literature and you will invariably find a pseud who thinks enjoying 'exotic' shit makes them smart.


Ayn Rand apologists have the most ludicrous case of "doublethink" I've ever come across in my entire time on the internet.

They will flat-out acknowledge that John Galt's monologue that goes on for 90 some-odd pages about morality is tedious. They will acknowledge that you'd be better off reading the Wikipedia article about Objectivism. Hell, they will even say that Ayn Rand was more of a political writer than a fiction writer. But they will still insist that you must read the entirety of Atlas Shrugged from cover to cover, and that it's definitively not rubbish because of its impact on Western culture or something.

Also, daily reminder that Ayn Rand spent her entire life idolising the wealthy and stigmatising the destitute, only to end up relying on the very same welfare state she decried so fervently in her old age.
View attachment 4657492
Rands books are mediocre at best but criticizing her for using social security is as retarded as decrying OJ Simpson for stealing his own shirts. I'd respect lolbertarians more if they advocated for SSI and Welfare fraud instead of sitting in a corner whining that the government steals their money instead of just stealing it back.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Mexican_Wizard_711
@Jarolleon Mencken was a douche.


Ayn Rand apologists have the most ludicrous case of "doublethink" I've ever come across in my entire time on the internet.

They will flat-out acknowledge that John Galt's monologue that goes on for 90 some-odd pages about morality is tedious. They will acknowledge that you'd be better off reading the Wikipedia article about Objectivism. Hell, they will even say that Ayn Rand was more of a political writer than a fiction writer. But they will still insist that you must read the entirety of Atlas Shrugged from cover to cover, and that it's definitively not rubbish because of its impact on Western culture or something.

Also, daily reminder that Ayn Rand spent her entire life idolising the wealthy and stigmatising the destitute, only to end up relying on the very same welfare state she decried so fervently in her old age.
View attachment 4657492
Well, my unpopular opinion:
I'm not an Objectivist and the long monolgoues (particulary D'Ancona's parable of the factory that implemented socialism) were top-notch writing and stand perfectly well all on their own.

Any economics related book when you are not actually studying economics. Dont worry, I do it too.
Why do you say that, or what do you mean by "studying" economics? Economic theory nowadays is a subdiscipline of mathematics, needlessly complex and completely inaccessible to the public. They write articles that are a dozen pages of algebra and inference to prove something like "people working together over time become more efficient."
 
Back