Author Topic: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature  (Read 666 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SolEX01

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,375
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of New Jersey
ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« on: October 29, 2013, 02:53:14 PM »
From the Other Topics board, the following discussion took place regarding a distinction between Modern and contemporary literature:

The OP, rewritten without starting sentences with "it" or "and":

Anyone who has read a fair amount of classic English literature (e.g. KJV, Shakespeare, Milton) knows there is nothing wrong with starting a sentence with "And" or "It." This is one of those vacuous rules invented by semi-literates who somehow landed a job teaching grammar to children.

My apparently semi-literate English teachers didn't teach me the grammar of the KJV, Shakespeare, Milton, et al.

Consider technical writing.  Look at any technical paper out there - any sentences that start with it or and?

I used to give presentations to a customer who harshly criticized the use of "this" in spoken language.
The piece under consideration, horrendous though it be, is a poem, and not the instruction manual for a Thighmaster, though the literary merit of the two pieces may not be too dissimilar.

Consider modern authors like J.K. Rowling or E.L. James.  I wonder if either of them starts a sentence with it or and?  ???
If you're being facetious, bravo!  If you're serious: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

I'll accept what you say as a compliment.   :laugh:

Modern Authors include, but are not limited to: Oscar Wilde, James Joyce,  Bram Stoker, Flann O'Brien, Virgina Woolf and others.

I'm not familiar with any of their work so I wouldn't know if they started sentences with it or and.  By mentioning J.K. Rowling and E.L. James, I'm narrowing modern authors to British authors born after 1963.

Those would be contemporary  authors, not modern authors. The Modern Period, by easy conventions, begins with Queen Victoria up until around the 1950s

Contemporary is a synonym for modern.  Why create another division in the 1950's?

Offline J Michael

  • Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,717
  • Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2013, 02:56:28 PM »
From the Other Topics board, the following discussion took place regarding a distinction between Modern and contemporary literature:

The OP, rewritten without starting sentences with "it" or "and":

Anyone who has read a fair amount of classic English literature (e.g. KJV, Shakespeare, Milton) knows there is nothing wrong with starting a sentence with "And" or "It." This is one of those vacuous rules invented by semi-literates who somehow landed a job teaching grammar to children.

My apparently semi-literate English teachers didn't teach me the grammar of the KJV, Shakespeare, Milton, et al.

Consider technical writing.  Look at any technical paper out there - any sentences that start with it or and?

I used to give presentations to a customer who harshly criticized the use of "this" in spoken language.
The piece under consideration, horrendous though it be, is a poem, and not the instruction manual for a Thighmaster, though the literary merit of the two pieces may not be too dissimilar.

Consider modern authors like J.K. Rowling or E.L. James.  I wonder if either of them starts a sentence with it or and?  ???
If you're being facetious, bravo!  If you're serious: LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

I'll accept what you say as a compliment.   :laugh:

Modern Authors include, but are not limited to: Oscar Wilde, James Joyce,  Bram Stoker, Flann O'Brien, Virgina Woolf and others.

I'm not familiar with any of their work so I wouldn't know if they started sentences with it or and.  By mentioning J.K. Rowling and E.L. James, I'm narrowing modern authors to British authors born after 1963.

Those would be contemporary  authors, not modern authors. The Modern Period, by easy conventions, begins with Queen Victoria up until around the 1950s

Contemporary is a synonym for modern.  Why create another division in the 1950's?

Because there are "hipsters", "literati", and pseudo-intellectuals who think they are beyond and better than "modern", i.e. post-modern?
"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,292
  • An Ideal to Strive Towards
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2013, 02:57:33 PM »
Modern philosophy: Descartes through Hegel

Contemporary philosophy: Mostly twentieth century stuff, but can go back as far as Kierkegaard .
My posts no longer forum here.

Offline SolEX01

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,375
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of New Jersey
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2013, 03:00:13 PM »
Because there are "hipsters", "literati", and pseudo-intellectuals who think they are beyond and better than "modern", i.e. post-modern?

I agree that there is such a thing as post-modern literature; however, using the examples of J.K. Rowling and E.L. James, I see nothing post-modern about their work.

Offline SolEX01

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,375
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of New Jersey
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #4 on: October 29, 2013, 03:01:28 PM »
Modern philosophy: Descartes through Hegel

Contemporary philosophy: Mostly twentieth century stuff, but can go back as far as Kierkegaard .

Is there a distinction between contemporary and post-modern when applied to philosophy?

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,950
  • Pray for me, a sinner.
    • Blog
  • Faith: Christ Clothes
  • Jurisdiction: Puerto Rican Orthodox Sobor
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2013, 03:12:15 PM »
Because there are "hipsters", "literati", and pseudo-intellectuals who think they are beyond and better than "modern", i.e. post-modern?

I agree that there is such a thing as post-modern literature; however, using the examples of J.K. Rowling and E.L. James, I see nothing post-modern about their work.

I would file their works as "rubbish."  Well, Rowling is just contemporary children's fiction.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

No longer pasting here.

Offline J Michael

  • Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,717
  • Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2013, 03:15:09 PM »
Because there are "hipsters", "literati", and pseudo-intellectuals who think they are beyond and better than "modern", i.e. post-modern?

I agree that there is such a thing as post-modern literature; however, using the examples of J.K. Rowling and E.L. James, I see nothing post-modern about their work.

So...what distinguishes post-modern lit. from any other kind of literature?  Surely it has something to do with style and "attitude" and not just the calendar?

Next question:  Why do these distinctions even matter??
"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)

Offline TheMathematician

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,898
  • Formerly known as Montalo
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: ACROD
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #7 on: October 29, 2013, 03:24:44 PM »
Because we're humans and love distinctions, haha.

A secondary example of Modern could stretch as far back as Shakespeare.

Part of the reason for distinction is to group them into movements, and to avoid the eternal modern, because if modern simply means now, then we are always living in modernity, and even something written 3 years ago is no longer modern, because it belongs to the past. Even this post is no longer modern, because by the time I hit the post button, the action of my posting is completed.

Offline TheMathematician

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,898
  • Formerly known as Montalo
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: ACROD
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2013, 03:27:08 PM »
Also, the 1950s should more accurately be, the fall of Nazi Germany in 1945 and the end of the war.

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,300
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2013, 03:27:37 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.
If you have PMed me, the mods have taken my ability to PM away. Please see my email if you wish to contact me during my time of trial.

Offline J Michael

  • Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,717
  • Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #10 on: October 29, 2013, 03:32:15 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?
"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,300
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #11 on: October 29, 2013, 03:37:06 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?

Really J Michal do you ever ask something which has some substance? You want a rule set for everything and you like many others think inability to offer one and realizing that no rule set can be offered is some profound insight or legitimate criticism. The forum buzzes with too many would be gadflies.
If you have PMed me, the mods have taken my ability to PM away. Please see my email if you wish to contact me during my time of trial.

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,300
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #12 on: October 29, 2013, 03:38:05 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?

Ask the Barnes and Noble employee. I am sure they can offer you a definition via a list.
If you have PMed me, the mods have taken my ability to PM away. Please see my email if you wish to contact me during my time of trial.

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,898
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2013, 03:38:49 PM »
"Where do you draw the line?" is generally a pretty unhelpful question that leads to insanity.

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #14 on: October 29, 2013, 03:40:26 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?
I believe Harold Bloom canonized the entirety of Western Literature.

Look up his book.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,898
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2013, 03:42:52 PM »
I vaguely recall Harold Bloom having some choice words about J.K. Rowling

Offline Romaios

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,933
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2013, 03:45:51 PM »
I vaguely recall Harold Bloom having some choice words about J.K. Rowling

Tolkien too.

Offline Cyrillic

  • The Laughing Cavalier
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,033
  • Φέρ' ὕδωρ φέρ' οἶνον, ὦ παῖ!
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Finland
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #17 on: October 29, 2013, 03:50:45 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?
I believe Harold Bloom canonized the entirety of Western Literature.

Look up his book.

A list of books Harold Bloom happens to like isn't the same as the Western Canon.
At nunc desertis cessant sacraria lucis:
aurum omnes victa iam pietate colunt.
-Propertius, Elegies III.XIII:47-48

νίκας τοῖς Βασιλεῦσι κατὰ βαρβάρων δωρούμενος

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #18 on: October 29, 2013, 03:52:49 PM »
I vaguely recall Harold Bloom having some choice words about J.K. Rowling
LOL yeah and I forgot who else.

But it was more for Jeff's amusement.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #19 on: October 29, 2013, 03:58:19 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?
I believe Harold Bloom canonized the entirety of Western Literature.

Look up his book.

A list of books Harold Bloom happens to like isn't the same as the Western Canon.
I guess I need to make jokes more obvious.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline J Michael

  • Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,717
  • Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #20 on: October 29, 2013, 04:14:06 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?

Really J Michal do you ever ask something which has some substance? You want a rule set for everything and you like many others think inability to offer one and realizing that no rule set can be offered is some profound insight or legitimate criticism. The forum buzzes with too many would be gadflies.


Yes, I do.  Guess you missed them.  I think there might have been one or two hiding amongst my 8300+ posts.   But God only knows what you consider to be "substance".  I, for one, do not pretend to profundity, nor do I have any need to attempt to establish some kind of "legitimacy" from, of all people, you.  If you don't like my posts or my substance-less questions, you're certainly free to ignore them with no hard feelings from me.  That's what I do to most of your posts, even the ones I understand.

"The forum buzzes with too many would be gadflies"---And you're the self-appointed fly slayer??  ROTFL!!!
« Last Edit: October 29, 2013, 04:24:19 PM by J Michael »
"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)

Offline J Michael

  • Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,717
  • Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #21 on: October 29, 2013, 04:17:47 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?

Ask the Barnes and Noble employee. I am sure they can offer you a definition via a list.

That was helpful.
"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)

Offline J Michael

  • Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,717
  • Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!
  • Faith: Catholic
  • Jurisdiction: Eparchy of Passaic
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #22 on: October 29, 2013, 04:18:56 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?
I believe Harold Bloom canonized the entirety of Western Literature.

Look up his book.

A list of books Harold Bloom happens to like isn't the same as the Western Canon.
I guess I need to make jokes more obvious.

Emoticons are useful for that very purpose.
"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)

Offline Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,292
  • An Ideal to Strive Towards
Re: ITT: We discuss modern vs. contemporary literature
« Reply #23 on: October 29, 2013, 05:02:44 PM »
Contemporary hardly means modern.

For sloppy day to day talk fine, but once you use hifalutin talk like literature, that dog no longer hunts.

When does something that someone writes (usually fiction??) become "literature", as opposed to, well....non-literature?

Really J Michal do you ever ask something which has some substance? You want a rule set for everything and you like many others think inability to offer one and realizing that no rule set can be offered is some profound insight or legitimate criticism. The forum buzzes with too many would be gadflies.


Yes, I do.  Guess you missed them.  I think there might have been one or two hiding amongst my 8300+ posts.   But God only knows what you consider to be "substance".  I, for one, do not pretend to profundity, nor do I have any need to attempt to establish some kind of "legitimacy" from, of all people, you.  If you don't like my posts or my substance-less questions, you're certainly free to ignore them with no hard feelings from me.  That's what I do to most of your posts, even the ones I understand.

"The forum buzzes with too many would be gadflies"---And you're the self-appointed fly slayer??  ROTFL!!!

Michael, this responses, for me, establishes you as one of the most reasonable and legitmate of posters. I enjoy everything you write on this forum.
My posts no longer forum here.