The difference is that most born in 2004 will have completely unmonitered, super-fast access to the internet throughout their formative early/late teen years, as well as smart phones and social media that are optimised to envelop the user in an unlimited stream of half-interesting, easy entertainment/social experience. If you want to say the negative effects of that are overexaggerated, thats fine, but if you think such a drastic difference in how young people spend their time will have NO effect you are profoundly stupid
Honestly, I think they might even be better off. I’m a late millennial so smartphones really took off while I was in high school and social media while I was in college. There was definitely a sense for me when I got old enough that I came up in a time where you expected to do things that everyone before you did, even while everything was crumbling. You couldn’t study English because that wasn’t practical. School wasn’t going to pay off anyway but we had to be the most educated. Your job was going to suck but you had to be a striver anyway. Obviously, everyone ended up feeling like they just wasted their adult years. With zoomers, at least they sort of know that this whole thing is a fucking wreck and even though their brains are friend from social media and screen addiction, that pressure to cling to shitty ways of life that don’t even work anymore as they come of age doesn’t seem to be there. Zoomers don’t have to pretend like their degrees or their jobs still matter, or as if there’s any way they should live their lives other than one that’s interesting and compelling. Obviously, this isn’t the case for all zoomers, but the ones that we might address it can be.
1994 here. I had PC and unfettered internet access in 1999. Thanks boomer parents. But the early ‘00s internet was just way, way different if you were on it at all.
I was using the internet before you were born, back in those days it was TV that was going to doom a generation and end literature, internet use was seen as positive but that is mostly because when your parents walked into the room they just saw a screen filled with text and thought you were doing technical computer things even though you were just downloading porn.
Novels are dead, they have been for decades. A new format would arise if those interested in long-form fiction weren't all so pathetic and afraid of art that isn't controlled by hostile elements.
What new format could possibly arise in a world dominated by moving pictures on a screen? See, it’s really not just novels that are dead but to a huge extent the written word. It struggled to compete with the television and now it has the television, smart phones, computers, and video games to compete with. It just doesn’t stand a chance.
Fucking hypertext documents you unimaginative dumbass. Computers show words, too. Of course it will be less popular than multimedia. So what, do you read for the clout?
Not true. Much like the majority of good writers lost to the Great War (France), the few that survived had managed to write great novels, while those that hadn't participated wrote anarcho-communist schlock for pedophiles. The same is true in this century. I will likely die in a horrific war at the hand of a nation of millions of Asians before my masterpiece is completed. All while the homo-intersectional re-writings of the Bible or Illiad, are sold at pedo pothead conventions en masse.
There have been only two great novels: Don Quijote and Ulysses. Great novels are published just once every 300 years, everything else has always been worthless, only redeemable a posteriori, by whatever of them can be found in the Great Novel. Meanwhile, you should turn to other genres.
Perhaps novels are outdated? Like how radio became so after the dawn of television and then internet was another big blow. Novels only became so relevant and popular in a particular age (see how sci-fi came of age in a particular age lel). Maybe we should just enjoy the old works and not look forward to any literary novels as if except for the very very unknown few they're being written anyway. Products of a certain timeframe novels have become perhaps obsolete?
Novels have never had the popularity of radio, tv or the internet, they have always been niche outside of a few fads which are ultimately superficial (but still enjoyable and of worth within their context).
Is this the new twitter posting just some retards opinion on tiktok, kill yourself homosexual. Sage.
isn’t it past your bedtime, gramps?
What is the difference between being born in 1994 and 2004 really? Your teenage and young adulthood is basically the same either way.
The difference is that most born in 2004 will have completely unmonitered, super-fast access to the internet throughout their formative early/late teen years, as well as smart phones and social media that are optimised to envelop the user in an unlimited stream of half-interesting, easy entertainment/social experience. If you want to say the negative effects of that are overexaggerated, thats fine, but if you think such a drastic difference in how young people spend their time will have NO effect you are profoundly stupid
t. born in 2002
Honestly, I think they might even be better off. I’m a late millennial so smartphones really took off while I was in high school and social media while I was in college. There was definitely a sense for me when I got old enough that I came up in a time where you expected to do things that everyone before you did, even while everything was crumbling. You couldn’t study English because that wasn’t practical. School wasn’t going to pay off anyway but we had to be the most educated. Your job was going to suck but you had to be a striver anyway. Obviously, everyone ended up feeling like they just wasted their adult years. With zoomers, at least they sort of know that this whole thing is a fucking wreck and even though their brains are friend from social media and screen addiction, that pressure to cling to shitty ways of life that don’t even work anymore as they come of age doesn’t seem to be there. Zoomers don’t have to pretend like their degrees or their jobs still matter, or as if there’s any way they should live their lives other than one that’s interesting and compelling. Obviously, this isn’t the case for all zoomers, but the ones that we might address it can be.
1994 here. I had PC and unfettered internet access in 1999. Thanks boomer parents. But the early ‘00s internet was just way, way different if you were on it at all.
I was using the internet before you were born, back in those days it was TV that was going to doom a generation and end literature, internet use was seen as positive but that is mostly because when your parents walked into the room they just saw a screen filled with text and thought you were doing technical computer things even though you were just downloading porn.
If abortion countries can get rid of downs they could get rid of aspergers and autism
Novels are dead, they have been for decades. A new format would arise if those interested in long-form fiction weren't all so pathetic and afraid of art that isn't controlled by hostile elements.
What new format could possibly arise in a world dominated by moving pictures on a screen? See, it’s really not just novels that are dead but to a huge extent the written word. It struggled to compete with the television and now it has the television, smart phones, computers, and video games to compete with. It just doesn’t stand a chance.
Fucking hypertext documents you unimaginative dumbass. Computers show words, too. Of course it will be less popular than multimedia. So what, do you read for the clout?
>long-form fiction
Novels still serve an important purpose...to provide the basis for TV shows and movies.
That's where novel authors really make their money.
It’s not like the 20th century was particularly good for literature either
I am going to write it but you need to give me a few years. I need to work my way up somehow and obtain a book deal.
Not true. Much like the majority of good writers lost to the Great War (France), the few that survived had managed to write great novels, while those that hadn't participated wrote anarcho-communist schlock for pedophiles. The same is true in this century. I will likely die in a horrific war at the hand of a nation of millions of Asians before my masterpiece is completed. All while the homo-intersectional re-writings of the Bible or Illiad, are sold at pedo pothead conventions en masse.
Alright except everyone now is growing up retarded so it’s a little different from a hundred years ago.
No linguistic, cultural, or philosophical ramifications, just some sad people getting old and desperately trying to cling to the past.
Most people who took the corona vax will be dead within 3-5 years anyway
There have been only two great novels: Don Quijote and Ulysses. Great novels are published just once every 300 years, everything else has always been worthless, only redeemable a posteriori, by whatever of them can be found in the Great Novel. Meanwhile, you should turn to other genres.
Perhaps novels are outdated? Like how radio became so after the dawn of television and then internet was another big blow. Novels only became so relevant and popular in a particular age (see how sci-fi came of age in a particular age lel). Maybe we should just enjoy the old works and not look forward to any literary novels as if except for the very very unknown few they're being written anyway. Products of a certain timeframe novels have become perhaps obsolete?
Novels have never had the popularity of radio, tv or the internet, they have always been niche outside of a few fads which are ultimately superficial (but still enjoyable and of worth within their context).