Conspiracy theories vs. the Western canon

we have a gay thread that could use a little goosing, you know

voted for ballsack even tho i generally spell it ballsac, not to be confused with Balzac, of the Western canon

Comes down to protocols of the elders of Zion vs stagecoach for me, voted nutsack

i'm a canon boi

i've even been polling canonical artists and authors recently. bringing you guys a taste of high school humanities class

I ride the canonballsack like my name was Munchausen

https://dch81km8r5tow.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/maya_adrock02.jpg

I love sac

esby rides again

this is fairly easy for me; i would rather lick beethoven's taint than cause a measles epidemic

Mozart’s would be apter

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

i keep my tongue on the balls of truth

For many, many years I thought EPMD made a literary pun, "get the Balzac" (which was a euphemism for "get the ball-sack" anyway).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_3B8How0K8

my lifelong love of conspiracy theories is not gonna survive the era of the current admin

And yet I cannot endorse the canon

The fallacy that is being subtly promoted here is that one's personal relationship with any or all of the works of art and thought which make up the western canon requires anything from you other than approaching each of these works and finding out what you can discover of value in them. I clearly recall reading Plato avidly as a 20 year old, all the while mentally arguing with his formulations and conclusions, seeing past his rhetorical smoke and sorting out what seemed right from what seemed wrong. In the process I had thoughts I may not have otherwise had, but far from worshipping his Established Authority, I took only what I could use.

That is what The Western Canon is for, and ironically many, if not most, of the authors or artists in that canon felt exactly the same way and heaped scorn on those who worship Authority instead of thinking things through themselves. It is the academics, critics and minor scholiasts who seem to think these are sacred artifacts to praise lavishly or to idolize.

Addendum: People who think they enhance their standing in the eyes of others by insinuating that they would, if they cared to, demolish every work in the western canon, but it would be so easy that they (yawn) don't really care to demonstrate the full extent of their superiority on such rabbit droppings, are tiresome jackasses.

omg can't believe you tongue the sac, wait until i tell all my friends

Rather: Aimless otm as per uzh. The works of the Western canon aren't the problem. The problem is the staid absence of critical distance which allows one to believe in a canon which much be cherished and cast in amber. There's a term for people who maintain such notions, and the term is 'Rosicrucians backed by the Illuminati'. I learned all about it in one of those Tom Hanks/Ron Howard joints.

http://people.unica.it/fiorenzoiuliano/files/2017/05/tradition-and-the-individual-talent.pdf

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

a hearty hail and well met to my fellow ballsack-lickers!