Show Library: Pseudointellectual Books That, in Fact, Suck

[tdarko]

amplify,

Williams was a doctor, he was a doctor moreso than he was a poet actually and most that new him in NJ never actually knew of his writing and his double life. To me most of his best writing is his personal accounts about his job and his practice. Anyway, "Red Wheelbarrow" came about because of a trip to see a sick kid. This was back in the day when doctors went to the homes of the patients, when he walked in the child was standing in his room looking outside his window. Williams walked behind him and saw what the child was looking at, it was raining outside and all you could see was a red whellbarrow being rained on next to some white chickens and this kid was dying, yet he was smiling...so much depends upon how you perceive life. He was a part of the imagist movement and this was his quintessential imagist poem and not necessarily a breakthrough poem that solidified his style...he was still a part of "The Others" at this point and the houseman for them. It wasn't until later when he found his style.

Poets go through all kinds of phases.

[tdarko]

Blarg,

Much love, you are the best. I still want to know who fistface is.

[WhoIam]

[ QUOTE ]
How has Jung not been mentioned in a thread about pseudointellectual literature yet? I'd also throw Marx in there-- both are authors with grand, sweeping ideas about the nature of psychology/government and absolutely no evidence (only the occasional light dusting of flawed logic) to back up their claims. And college (and some smart High School) students everywhere totally ride their jocks.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would group Freud and Marx together as the height of pseudointellectualism. While they were both taken seriously decades ago, their theories are completely discredited and ridiculous. Even "marxists" don't agree with everything in "Capital." Pseudointellectuals, of course, are not aware of this, and use references to Freud and Marx to sound smarter than they are.

I think Jung has stood the test of time better than Freud. While he certainly has written some silly stuff, like the idea of the collective unconscious, his ideas on introversion/extroversion and archetypes are still relevant. With something like the Shadow, it can't be proven or disproven but I find it a fascinating concept. I agree that a lot of douchebags and new-agers read (and often misinterpret) Jung, but they don't have to ruin it for everybody.

[Blarg]

One of the clearest pseudo-intellectualisms is classifying whatever one doesn't care for politically or otherwise as merely pseudo-intellectual. It's a sweet ploy!

[RunDownHouse]

tdarko,

Wow. Great post.

[challenger84]

[ QUOTE ]
their theories are completely discredited and ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

completely wrong. why do people spout off like this when they have no idea what they are talking about?

[WhoIam]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
their theories are completely discredited and ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]
completely wrong. why do people spout off like this when they have no idea what they are talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like somebody needs a more dominant superego

[challenger84]

Sounds like somebody just took psychology 101

[Blarg]

You're pretty much required to say Freud, Marx, and Hemingway suck these days, if you want to stay on people's good sides, because they're all doing it too. Stay posted for further alerts on people we're all supposed to be wiser than whom we may never even have read, much less understood in the slightest.

This is basically standard with college kids and people who never did more than cursory reading these days.

[amplify]

Rousseau - Worse than Thoreau
Milton - I really want to like Milton, but it is not possible.
Anthony Burgess - Horrible writer, luckboxed Clockwork Orange.