If I recall correctly (and it's literally been many decades), only (the first?) part of The Jungle Book is about Mowgli and his bullshit. The rest of it is basically animal fables, which girls like, too.
Fuck Jane Austen and whatever boring crap she wrote.
Oh, that’s… That’s not why they’re cancelling Kipling, my dude…
The guy was much more than The Jungle Book…
Though how much of that was featured in Matilda, vis a vis simply replacing one “conservative male author” with a “progressive (for her time) feminist author”, I do not know…
Kipling was like… The antithesis of modern “wokie” literature… Hence his erasure, lol…
I've read Jane Austen's oeuvre pretty much entirely. I would be seriously hesitant to describe her as a progressive. She does a pretty good job of refraining from making any actual opinion and mostly just pokes fun at the sensibilities of the upper-class of late 1700's England. Each book ends in a wedding, happily ever after style, and it's pretty clear that the ideas of the upper-class are justified once more after she's teased them a little. It's pure literary comedy in the classical sense.
Fair enough. I more meant that she was a woman, not writing under a pseudonym, in that time period…
Her actual work may not be all that “progressive” by today’s standards, but she was still a massive outlier for the time…
Like Mary Shelley, or the Bronte sisters, et al…
That’s why liberals today (or whatever we want to call the ones doing the censoring) look up to her so much, rather than anything to do with a) her own written words, or b) whatever her actual beliefs and views on things may have been…
Her actual work may not be all that “progressive” by today’s standards
Her actual work was often satire calling out how pants on head retarded certain cultural expectation were. That's the entire point of 'Pride and Prejudice' and yet there are legion of women who take the book at face value and then wonder why IRL doesn't have rich bachelors walking across fields in the rain to woo them.
I'll have to look that up. I always thought that literature was one of the places where chicks do a pretty good job. The only major chick that wrote under a male synonym that I can think of is George Elliot -- and that was only because her writing was explicitly feminist, and she thought that men wouldn't stand for such whining from a chick.
If I recall correctly (and it's literally been many decades), only (the first?) part of The Jungle Book is about Mowgli and his bullshit. The rest of it is basically animal fables, which girls like, too.
Fuck Jane Austen and whatever boring crap she wrote.
Oh, that’s… That’s not why they’re cancelling Kipling, my dude…
The guy was much more than The Jungle Book…
Though how much of that was featured in Matilda, vis a vis simply replacing one “conservative male author” with a “progressive (for her time) feminist author”, I do not know…
Kipling was like… The antithesis of modern “wokie” literature… Hence his erasure, lol…
I've read Jane Austen's oeuvre pretty much entirely. I would be seriously hesitant to describe her as a progressive. She does a pretty good job of refraining from making any actual opinion and mostly just pokes fun at the sensibilities of the upper-class of late 1700's England. Each book ends in a wedding, happily ever after style, and it's pretty clear that the ideas of the upper-class are justified once more after she's teased them a little. It's pure literary comedy in the classical sense.
Fair enough. I more meant that she was a woman, not writing under a pseudonym, in that time period…
Her actual work may not be all that “progressive” by today’s standards, but she was still a massive outlier for the time…
Like Mary Shelley, or the Bronte sisters, et al…
That’s why liberals today (or whatever we want to call the ones doing the censoring) look up to her so much, rather than anything to do with a) her own written words, or b) whatever her actual beliefs and views on things may have been…
Her actual work was often satire calling out how pants on head retarded certain cultural expectation were. That's the entire point of 'Pride and Prejudice' and yet there are legion of women who take the book at face value and then wonder why IRL doesn't have rich bachelors walking across fields in the rain to woo them.
Vis a vis Kipling who, while obviously a great writer, was pretty much “Upper Class British male imperialist” personified…
No wonder they don’t like him, lol…
I'll have to look that up. I always thought that literature was one of the places where chicks do a pretty good job. The only major chick that wrote under a male synonym that I can think of is George Elliot -- and that was only because her writing was explicitly feminist, and she thought that men wouldn't stand for such whining from a chick.