Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 1617. page

Are you from poland maybe? Let it be foreigners crit thread

>tfw not native speaker
>tfw can't think quickly enough to keep up with /lit/s lightning wit and engage in banter with my fellow patricians
kill me now

>shit at grammer so get laughed at whenever I post my shit
Native English speaker here and I just want to die, my man.

Just do it without explanation.
AKA the post-modern way.

>>9214549
use different colored text for different characters, dummy

>>9214549
Read Boquitas Pintadas by Manuel Puig or something by Vargas Llosa. I'm not saying "it's been done before try smth else lol" but these books may give you a hint

>>9214455
Either the world is illusory or our perception is. Can't be both simultaneously.

>>9214455
Nobody knows. The only thing that we can know with absolute certainty is that our consciousness exists. Everything that we sense is compiled into a format that we can comprehend using our man made concepts. (I read Immanuel Kant btw so im basically a genius)

File: well hopefully we all stop fucking each other.jpg (29KB, 342x491px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 342x491px

Baudrillard thread, fuck yes. It's been a while since I read him but I've been thinking about his work a lot recently.

So isn't the idea that B basically takes the illusory nature of the world as a basic axiom? That is, that all you can know about it is that you can't really know it, since it's always being mediated by an ever-changing play of signs? The network or system of signs itself can be theorized, consumption has a logic, but the idea of there being something 'really real' beneath this logic is what he is rejecting; it is in fact the idea that for him there is *nothing* 'underneath' these signs which gives them their reason for being.

He seems to basically be taking consumer culture as metaphysics, and once any alternative to capitalism becomes impossible for him he subsequently takes this as a fact, that the image itself supplies its own recursive centre of gravity, and the subject accordingly has to just kind of sit back and watch. Capital produces this fake world that eventually becomes more real than the real
one.

And yet, which is what is cool about him, he's not being a meme ironist about it. Basically, he's going to take any notion of there being a real as banal.

In his later works I kind of feel like his aim is actually to redpill Marxists by trying to show them how much more complicated consumption is than the labor theory of value. He won't *valorize* the system of consumption itself (because he knows that it is empty) but he doesn't take cheap pot-shots at it either (because he doesn't feel that there is an alternative to it). So he adopts this Nietzschean stance instead, this aristocratic attitude of seduction, which is sort of like writing a Fatalist's Survival Guide, a survival guide which doesn't actually help you to survive but only to avoid dying for one of a billion possible banal reasons.

The other thing here, which may or may not be interesting, is that to me at least Baudrillard should fall well outside the Petersonian critique, that all these guys were hostile to life and so on. It would be better to say that about Baudrillard that his thought would only be hostile to a mode of life *competely mediated by passive consumption,* but not life itself in what I think would have been for B the most important aspect: the aristocratic-critic.

>tfw you feel called upon to defend dead French guys against an angry Jungian freight-train
>actually kind of fun

IT

WAS

DA

You might be interested in Lewis Thomas. I've read a few essays from "The Medusa and the Snail" and I thought they were interesting.

They do not go into detail on specific topics. They are more like musings and anecdotes directed at laypeople.

The Beak of the Finch

Blood Music, by Greg Bear.

warning: "Childhoods' End"-style ending.

Just what the hell does Rimbaud's "Novel" all about? Is there more to it than just a group of ungrateful youths getting drunk and romanticizong loneliness?

>>9214299
Stop fetishising somebody who would have hated being fetishisised

>>9214299
Probably Rimbaud, probably the Drunken Boat. Charles Nichol's book on Rimbaud in Africa is very, very good.

me, my diary desu is so overrated

>>9214286
Dostoevsky

more like consciousness explained away :^)

>>9214412
what?

>>9214412
kek

>>9214241
write actual fiction, not memoirs with the names changed

Go to bed, Tao

>rating books

Goodreads is truly cancerous.

It was unfinshed, so it just turns into an outline. I love that he literally wrote it on toilet paper.

>>9214145
>does it get worse

you fucking bet it will

>>9214254
>I love that he literally wrote it on toilet paper.
That explains why he wrote such shit.

since the day it came out it has been the present. Over a million masterpiece novels composed every day

Sombody post that imgur collection of that hooker on twitter sharing her story about florida or whatever

alt lit already tried it and it was shit

>asking CS advice on literature board
if this is your sense of humor - kill yourself
if this is actually sincere - kill yourself
read SICP, TAOCP and Concrete Mathematics
practice more than you read
also kill yourself
sage

>>9213853
sorry you're having a bad day, sugar. I'm mainly asking for book recs.

>>9213839
Being good at computer science means being resourceful. Go to /sci/ and read their wiki you retard.

>>9213772
bump

>>9213793
bump

The most guarded Information is not external.

>not living over 120 years
Why would you voluntarily be this pleb?

Humankind will likely destroy itself before 2100, it's your job to preserve it's last moments for the future alien scholars.

>>9213618
I'm in the same situation, but I will define it.

It's fun to imagine the dialogues and interpreting however you want. In my opinion, it also helps to organise your text

>>9213248
Direct speech has the advantage that it can showcase a character not only on what he says, but his choice of word. What is said in the conversation is just as important as how it was said and who said it.

If what is important is that the conversation happenned and the information contained within, then using indirect speech seems like a sound decision. It has the risk and advantage of putting the characters through an impersonal light, which can be telling of certain relationships between charactes.

Ergo, if stuff needs to happen and the characters are secondary to their happening, indirect.

If you need to showcase a character and their changes and feelings, direct.

Le my opinion

>>9213248
What seems elegant and artistic to you is trite and bloated to anyone who's read all the crap by unpublished amateurs who think what what they're doing is elegant and artistic.

Sorry, buddy, but if you want to actually write nice-sounding prose, you have to work for it. Can't just flip the subject-predicate model on its head and call it art.