Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 1216. page

File: a.png (40KB, 1308x306px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1308x306px

Where's the line between patrician and wannabe writing?

File: 5452454.jpg (64KB, 575x323px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 575x323px

rate my opening line.

The vulva which is just a penis-template turns into a phallus.

File: 1492711653560.jpg (198KB, 1542x1023px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1542x1023px

where is the line between free verse and prose?
am I a brainlet for only being able to write poetry that rhymes or has some pattern?

File: dfdabfb6338b6d1bc37335fe84b45dc3[1].jpg (20KB, 236x337px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 236x337px

Any good books on the commodification of rebellion/revolution?

Any books that draw parallels between that and neoliberalism's progressive sheen?

File: zizek1015.jpg (20KB, 400x534px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 400x534px

>zizek sensei will die in my lifetime
i will cry, but i hope also dedicate a lot of time to studying his thought and keep his greatest interpretations

how would you react to your favourite authors dying, /lit/? have you experiences it before?

File: ce145c6358d35676144294de3df00f7b[1].jpg (32KB, 485x750px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 485x750px

What would you people recommend for someone interested in contemporary horror literature? It’s kind of hard to be more specific, but I think what I am after is this kind of “abstract” horror like in House of Leaves.

Regarding the distinction between terror and horror, I think it’s about building terror in a very psychological way. Probably without “showing” any kind of aberration, providing a sensation of “wrong” or “out of place” instead.

What are the essentials of this kind of contemporary terror?

File: philip-k-dick-the-simulacra-cover.jpg (377KB, 682x1049px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 682x1049px

does /lit/ like dick?

File: howtoreadabig.jpg (86KB, 659x1024px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 659x1024px

This board is turning into /b/ on books.

First people should go read "How to Read a Book" by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren(1972 revised.

Remember:

“Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider. Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested: that is, some books are to be read only in parts, others to be read, but not curiously, and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention.”

--Frances Bacon

Read on and learn people!!

File: fanged-product.jpg (185KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 900x675px

What the fuck is this bullshit? Is this actually what continental philosophy is like? I'm a few weeks from graduating with a BA in Philosophy and I've never had the displeasure of reading such a mess of philosophical expression. I read through Shamanic Nietzsche and Mechanic Desire before flipping through and finding that he just doodles graphs for the last few dozen pages. His specific claims can't be isolated or analyzed because he insists on the most purple prose possible.

This isn't even philosophy, it's literature for people who can't write characters and find even the constraints of contemporary poetry annoying, so they publish in self-referential journals using the most obscuritarian standards possible.

This is why Nietzsche scholars still disagree on the fucking basics of his world view. No Russel or Cassier or Ayer scholars have to do that because they didn't do philosophy by having four page asides about castration anxiety when their/central/ point has yet to be made clear.

Jesus I know it's a meme book but why is this associated with philosophy

File: PieDiePie_LS.jpg (115KB, 575x360px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 575x360px

What are some good books for drinking weekend?

I don't want to have to focus a lot, will probably be hangover a lot, but still want to read something nice.

I would think of something similar to Sidhartha and John Steinbeck...

What do u think?

File: pynchmaster.png (33KB, 220x330px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 220x330px

Any good books about love?

File: dfw.jpg (122KB, 634x916px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 634x916px

>finals next week
>have done nothing but read unrelated Greek philosophy
>still don't know what infinite series or angular momentum are
>transferred out of a literature degree into engineering to make my parents happy but too much of a brainlet for it

File: interior_dante_divinecomedy_inf_01_005.jpg (99KB, 600x434px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 600x434px

Dante and Milton certainly had ancillary goals, sub-goals, to writing their epic poems. However, it seems to me that their main goal was to glorify God. Milton wants to do this by justifying God doing things the way he did concerning the Fall. Dante wants to do this by showing how medieval courtly love should eventually transform into love of the divine. That's my assessment, at least.

Are there any other great writers that write with the overarching goal of glorifying God?

File: 1490496289260.jpg (137KB, 640x461px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 640x461px

Why do people try to pronounce the name of foreign authors using not English, but Spanish, Portuguese, French or whatever other language the author himself speaks?

Let me give you an example: when people say 'Albert Camus' they'll usually say 'Albert' as you would pronounce it in English and 'Camus' either as 'Cam-oo' or 'Cam-ee'. Both of them are wrong in terms of French, yet people who say stuff like this will try to correct you.

Nietzsche is another good example: people will usually say something like 'Nee-tchee' or 'Nee-tcha'. Both of them are wrong in terms of German, and just as in the case of Camus, people will correct you if you deviate from those two pronunciations.

Why don't people just stop this rubbish and pronounce the names as they would in normal, day-to-day English? If you're going to get the name wrong anyways, why sound like a fucking tryhard?

File: 1465132008321.png (206KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 306x306px

How can anyone take English literature academia, literary theory, publishing companies, the media, and humanities departments seriously when they are perpetuated through social networks rather than the merit of their work and they all lied and viciously criticised [politician name censored to stay on topic]?

It seems like they're all a bunch of fraudulent faggots. Who seriously takes literary theory seriously? Or Gender Studies? Or boring as fuck pomo books? Or Rothko paintings?