Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2014-03-01 03:46 pm
[ SECRET POST #2615 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2615 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08. [repeat]
__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 074 secrets from Secret Submission Post #374.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
So, to be fair, it really is a pervasive attitude typical of the Russian school of literary criticism. (That teacher is by no means the only one). But admittedly, it has a lot to do with the history of the twentieth century. Like, there isn't much to be cheerful about, especially considering the fact that almost every writer was treated abominably and suffered a lot. Mandelstam did die in a concentration camp, half-mad and starved, having exchanged his only coat for a kilogram of sugar which was then promptly stolen from him. Blok did die of starvation.
And it does exist outside of Russia, too, and I do dislike it. But it is also true that many people do write because they are unhappy; and that happiness may actually reduce one's productivity.
I guess Ginzburg's saying should be paraphrased as "for some people, art is condensed unhappiness".
no subject