Contributing writer for The Artifice.

Junior Contributor I

  • Articles
  • Featured
  • Comments
  • Ext. Comments
  • Processed
  • Revisions
  • Topics
  • Topics Taken
  • Notes
  • Topics Proc.
  • Topics Rev.
  • Points
  • Rank
  • Score
    Sorry, no posts matched your criteria.

    Latest Topics


    Old v. New: the value of reading the 'classics' against the value of contemporary authors

    In all reality, it would seem that the best literary diet would consist of both old and newer literature. However, I’ve noticed that some people hold vehemently to one or the other, myself notwithstanding. It’d be interesting to see if anyone could turn this into an interesting discussion.

    • I feel that to make this topic effective, you would have to establish what counts as contemporary vs. what counts as classic. What decade establishes something as "new." It could be argued that Lord of the Rings is reaching the point of "Classic" as it came out in 1954. But it is still beloved as a contemporary piece of literature (due, in part, to the films). – Jemarc Axinto 8 years ago
    • Who are the "some people?" Academics? Why does this matter who holds on to what? A potential author will have to include this. – Cmandra 8 years ago
    • I also agree with Jemarc. I am very interested in seeing how someone takes this topic, great idea! – emilyinmannyc 8 years ago
    • If by old you mean: "classic" and by new you mean: "modern" this could be a very interesting topic! Something else to consider is that different generations could lean more towards one or the other; it all depends on the target reading audience in question. On a side note: verses in the topic title needs an "s". But the title itself is a little confusing, I would consider rewording it to maybe something shorter. – Megan Finsel 8 years ago
    • "Classic" is a very arbitrary term, and can often be problematic. This idea of separation between classic literature and modern literature oftentimes fails to acknowledge the value of modern writers and what they do for the future of writing and literature. To make this topic work, I would agree with Jemarc in saying that you would have to establish clear boundaries between what is classic and what is modern, and you'd have to do this in a more concrete manner than taste. The generational aspect is also important to consider, but I think the most important thing to note would be what inherently separates the "classics" from modern literature as a body. For instance, what does "The Great Gatsby" have as far as qualities that "The Hunger Games" does not? Beyond time period and subject matter, is there something inherently different in the quality or form of the writing? Just my thoughts on the subject. It's a good topic, and one that I've certainly heard and thought a lot about. – Farrow 8 years ago
    • I think there is also an implication that "classic" literature carries weight and MEANING where "modern" literature may be thought of as entertaining and for consumption. – MELSEY 8 years ago

    Sorry, no tides are available. Please update the filter.

    Latest Comments

    One of my favorite show, great article!

    Social Commentary in "Rick and Morty"

    Fantastic Read!

    The Rise of Antiheroes in Modern Superhero Films

    I suppose I do understand the appeal to make shocking art. Aesthetically, the more reaction, the more discourse occurs around the piece–hypothetically making the its rang as subject more expansive. Although, there is something to be said for nuance. Great article!

    Shock Art: The Name Says It All