if I (a girl) was a good friend of jane's and told her via letter that I was in love with her how do you think she would respond?
No.10251
Anonymous
2026-05-29 11:06:05
a question about jane austen
No.10253
Anonymous
2026-05-29 11:37:43
No.10258
Anonymous
2026-05-29 20:31:01
Can we get rostoid banned? Low effort posting and is obviously not going to show nudes but wants attention.
^ Ban gay incels as well.
No.10261
Anonymous
2026-05-30 08:45:49
>>10260
I agree, but that's not me :^). I'm married thanks
I agree, but that's not me :^). I'm married thanks
I would be willing to bear your posts if you at least participated in the discussions here
>>10264
what he means is... carry the conversation. You know, unlike you do IRL. Try to actually make your boring topic interesting rather than 'i'm a girl posting'.
This is the whole 'tits or gtfo' culture because if you want to make this about 'i'm a girl give me attention' then post your tits at least. But of course, you just want attention with out effort.
BAN THIS FOID
what he means is... carry the conversation. You know, unlike you do IRL. Try to actually make your boring topic interesting rather than 'i'm a girl posting'.
This is the whole 'tits or gtfo' culture because if you want to make this about 'i'm a girl give me attention' then post your tits at least. But of course, you just want attention with out effort.
BAN THIS FOID
>>10265
im a man and not the anon of this post
again, you don't know who's already participating in discussions
it's anonymous
im a man and not the anon of this post
again, you don't know who's already participating in discussions
it's anonymous
No.10268
Anonymous
2026-05-30 12:41:38
*op of this poster whatever
>>10267
ah, well either way. OP just needs to stop girl posting. thats all.
ah, well either way. OP just needs to stop girl posting. thats all.
No.10271
Anonymous
2026-05-30 13:00:06
>>10267
>again
That was a different guy. I could clearly tell you’re a man from your writing style. So basically get owned
>again
That was a different guy. I could clearly tell you’re a man from your writing style. So basically get owned
No.10276
Anonymous
2026-05-31 02:22:28
>>10269
>go on anonymous boards
>demand posters be and behave differently
>plead for bans
>has no incertitude regarding who anon is and isn't
>suffer the ensuing confusion
We are all masters at building our own ridiculous little hells.
>go on anonymous boards
>demand posters be and behave differently
>plead for bans
>has no incertitude regarding who anon is and isn't
>suffer the ensuing confusion
We are all masters at building our own ridiculous little hells.
No.10397
Anonymous
2026-06-05 02:51:46
>baiting on a dead imageboard
Shit thread but let's make it interesting, has anyone read Austen? What do you think about her novels? They occupy a weird, perhaps incomparable status in English literary culture, in that they seem to some extent like vaguely girly frivolous books, except that they are universally regarded as unimpeachably excellent and all sort of cigar smoking macho critics will trip over each other to be the first to tell you how genius they are.
>>10399
They are thorough stories. It's like high quality embroidery. Some part of you can't believe someone would devote so much time and craft to this, and some other part is still enthralled.
The fact that Austen deals with "female" topics and that the covers are pink blinds the more misogynistic readers but these are master pieces imo. Her novels display mastery and expert knowledge of the soul in specific (and now exotic) circumstances, and they also manage to be light and fun.
They are thorough stories. It's like high quality embroidery. Some part of you can't believe someone would devote so much time and craft to this, and some other part is still enthralled.
The fact that Austen deals with "female" topics and that the covers are pink blinds the more misogynistic readers but these are master pieces imo. Her novels display mastery and expert knowledge of the soul in specific (and now exotic) circumstances, and they also manage to be light and fun.
>>10399
I've read all austen books. like >>10401 said they're master pieces. there is a misconception that austen books are about romance in the olden times but only 2 of her books (pride & prejudice and persuasion) have strong elements of romance. she is a Christian author through and through and a strong proponent of stoicism and moderation. if the new age wannabe stoics understood that they would be flocking to her works but fortunately we have been spared that fate.
one of the favourite things about her work is that she is very careful with her choice of words and one would see that if they really set their mind on analysing her novels. every word is intentional. it's like she crafts puzzles and you have to do a constant flip of pages and rereads to fully understand the character motivations. I know it's what pretentious fans of any works say but it's true for her novels. a rumor has been spread about the protagonist! who is the perpetrator? it's all in the text but not spoonfed.
her family made it so that she was perceived as the virtuous, ideal woman of her time and that is still how a lot of people see her unless they dig into her letters to her sister (Cassandra).
"Mrs. Hall, of Sherborne, was brought to bed yesterday of a dead child, some weeks before she expected, owing to a fright. I suppose she happened unawares to look at her husband."
she was also ahead of her time, politically. she was an abolitionist. 2 main arguments for which are: 1) her book "mansfield park" (protagonist questions where sir Thomas's income comes from. plantation) and lord mansfield passed judgement in Somerset v stewart: "slavery had no basis in English common law".
2) one of her favorite poets was an abolitionist. Here's an excerpt from The Task:
"He finds his fellow guilty of a skin
Not coloured like his own, and having power
To enforce the wrong, for such a worthy cause
Dooms and devotes him as his lawful prey.
...
Thus man devotes his brother, and destroys;
And worse than all, and most to be deplored,
As human nature’s broadest, foulest blot,
Chains him, and tasks him, and exacts his sweat
With stripes, that mercy, with a bleeding heart,
Weeps when she sees inflicted on a beast.
Then what is man? And what man, seeing this,
And having human feelings, does not blush
And hang his head, to think himself a man?
I would not have a slave to till my ground,
To carry me, to fan me while I sleep,
And tremble when I wake, for all the wealth
That sinews bought and sold have ever earned.
No: dear as freedom is, and in my heart’s
Just estimation prized above all price,
I had much rather be myself the slave
And wear the bonds, than fasten them on him."
idk if formatting is going to be weird I've just copy pasted the excerpt. sorry if it is.
okay this just devolved into me fangirling about austen. im the original poster btw and the post was made in good faith. id assumed, incorrectly that there might be fellow austen mega fans here. lol.
I've read all austen books. like >>10401 said they're master pieces. there is a misconception that austen books are about romance in the olden times but only 2 of her books (pride & prejudice and persuasion) have strong elements of romance. she is a Christian author through and through and a strong proponent of stoicism and moderation. if the new age wannabe stoics understood that they would be flocking to her works but fortunately we have been spared that fate.
one of the favourite things about her work is that she is very careful with her choice of words and one would see that if they really set their mind on analysing her novels. every word is intentional. it's like she crafts puzzles and you have to do a constant flip of pages and rereads to fully understand the character motivations. I know it's what pretentious fans of any works say but it's true for her novels. a rumor has been spread about the protagonist! who is the perpetrator? it's all in the text but not spoonfed.
her family made it so that she was perceived as the virtuous, ideal woman of her time and that is still how a lot of people see her unless they dig into her letters to her sister (Cassandra).
"Mrs. Hall, of Sherborne, was brought to bed yesterday of a dead child, some weeks before she expected, owing to a fright. I suppose she happened unawares to look at her husband."
she was also ahead of her time, politically. she was an abolitionist. 2 main arguments for which are: 1) her book "mansfield park" (protagonist questions where sir Thomas's income comes from. plantation) and lord mansfield passed judgement in Somerset v stewart: "slavery had no basis in English common law".
2) one of her favorite poets was an abolitionist. Here's an excerpt from The Task:
"He finds his fellow guilty of a skin
Not coloured like his own, and having power
To enforce the wrong, for such a worthy cause
Dooms and devotes him as his lawful prey.
...
Thus man devotes his brother, and destroys;
And worse than all, and most to be deplored,
As human nature’s broadest, foulest blot,
Chains him, and tasks him, and exacts his sweat
With stripes, that mercy, with a bleeding heart,
Weeps when she sees inflicted on a beast.
Then what is man? And what man, seeing this,
And having human feelings, does not blush
And hang his head, to think himself a man?
I would not have a slave to till my ground,
To carry me, to fan me while I sleep,
And tremble when I wake, for all the wealth
That sinews bought and sold have ever earned.
No: dear as freedom is, and in my heart’s
Just estimation prized above all price,
I had much rather be myself the slave
And wear the bonds, than fasten them on him."
idk if formatting is going to be weird I've just copy pasted the excerpt. sorry if it is.
okay this just devolved into me fangirling about austen. im the original poster btw and the post was made in good faith. id assumed, incorrectly that there might be fellow austen mega fans here. lol.
No.10404
Anonymous
2026-06-05 11:16:24
>>10403
thanks and I agree.
I would recommend you read them in the order they were published. though persuasion is one of the two among her works that has more elements of romance like I mentioned, it was the last book that she published (alongside northanger abbey) and if you read the novels in published order you'll get to see how her views on romance changed from when she wrote Pride and prejudice to when she wrote persuasion. let northanger abbey be the last one you read, it's more lighthearted than the others.
thanks and I agree.
I would recommend you read them in the order they were published. though persuasion is one of the two among her works that has more elements of romance like I mentioned, it was the last book that she published (alongside northanger abbey) and if you read the novels in published order you'll get to see how her views on romance changed from when she wrote Pride and prejudice to when she wrote persuasion. let northanger abbey be the last one you read, it's more lighthearted than the others.
>>10399
One of my personal literary failures. I couldn't get ten pages into P&P and said "I could not give less of a shit what happens to these people" and never picked it back up again. It felt like being forced to watch Real Housewives or some tv slop like that. I'm sorry and I know this marks me as an uncultured retard and I fully embrace this.
One of my personal literary failures. I couldn't get ten pages into P&P and said "I could not give less of a shit what happens to these people" and never picked it back up again. It felt like being forced to watch Real Housewives or some tv slop like that. I'm sorry and I know this marks me as an uncultured retard and I fully embrace this.
No.10406
Anonymous
2026-06-05 12:29:50
>>10405
We all have these "cultural" failures. The real question is: how do we deal with them? Do they have to be dealt with?
I don't regret pushing myself through things I found not interesting. Eventually I understood the point, and it revealed some parts of the world that were until then hidden to me. But does this mean every non-interest must be turned into some sort of interest? How does one pick which to pursue and which to give up?
We all have these "cultural" failures. The real question is: how do we deal with them? Do they have to be dealt with?
I don't regret pushing myself through things I found not interesting. Eventually I understood the point, and it revealed some parts of the world that were until then hidden to me. But does this mean every non-interest must be turned into some sort of interest? How does one pick which to pursue and which to give up?