[ SECRET POST #2466 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2466 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.















Notes:

Late day at work, sorry.

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 010 secrets from Secret Submission Post #352.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - omgiknowthem ], [ 1 - troll ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

"If all the great artists and writers in the past had been only the ones who'd had recognition on their lifetimes, literature would be shitty."

...but that's how it works? Shakespear is so classic and awesome today, because in his time he was a celebrity. Same goes for all the greatest literature of all times, they were all best sellers in their days.

[(Anonymous)]

So that's how it went for Thoreau, Kafka, Dickinson, Darger, and Plath, huh?

[(Anonymous)]

Actually, several of his plays were panned when they came out. Yes, he gained a great deal of fame when he was writing stuff for the King's Men, but he faded back into obscurity very, very quickly. His later plays were basically ignored. Shakespeare appreciation is really an eighteenth-century thing.

[(Anonymous)]

Huh, the more you know.

[(Anonymous)]

And...SHOOTING STAR!

[arcadiaego]

The Great Gatsby was widely deemed the downfall of Fitzgerald's career.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, and Moby Dick's critical reception was disastrous, The Bell Jar was ignored, and all that proves...what, exactly? On the other hand, Don Quixote was popular enough in its day to inspire fanfic, New Yorkers waited on the docks to get their hands on the latest installments of Dickens's novels, and Pride and Prejudice, Adam Bede, The Grapes of Wrath, A Farewell to Arms, Catch-22 and Their Eyes Were Watching God were critical and popular successes.

A distressing number of people have this idea that truly great writing always languishes in obscurity in the author's lifetime because only a few people can appreciate its greatness, while stuff that's popular is all on the level of The DaVinci Code and Twilight. Nope.

[arcadiaego]

That doesn't actually make the comment I was replying to factually correct though.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, no, since that comment is so poorly worded it's hard to tell what the writer was getting at, let alone whether it's correct. But what I took from it was that if only authors who achieved recognition in their lifetime were considered great, our body of "great literature" would actually be a body of shitty literature--presumably because, as I said, the commenter is one of those people who thinks that popular = shit, and that true greatness is only ever recognized after one is dead.

They're wrong. If only books that were popular in their day ever enjoyed the status of "classics" or "greats," we'd lose out on many books that deserved that status. But we'd still have, at a guess, about 2/3 of our current body of "canon" works.