Literally filler: the book

>>7634397
Literally pleb: the redditor

>>7634403
hey reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeedit

>>7634397
You're right! Your reductive take on a classic work has changed my mind and added great value and discussion to /lit/. Generations of critics and writers are wrong! YOU, OP, SITTING IN PAJAMA PANTS IN YOUR DORM ROOM'S TWIN BED, YOU KNOW BETTER. Bless us bless us with your wisdom

>>7634403

Ad hominem.

>>7634664

Appeal to tradition/authority, ad hominem.

Retry?

>>7634675
neck yourself

>>7634675
(You)

>>7634397
if you don't much like tolstoy, you could try dostoevsky. much better.

>>7634681

Quite the rebuttal.

>>7634682

Likewise.

These threads are an amazing demonstration of what /lit/ is - empty posturing. No one is capable of presenting an argument to support their conviction, which is clearly held strongly, though not deeply.

Most of you are the Woolf middlebrows. Try articulating your thoughts on why the OP is wrong, instead of blindly regurgitating dogma.

>>7634675
retry what??? no one on earth is going to seriously respond some brokedick fuck's 4 word take-down of a classic book

>>7634397
Filler?
Filler!!!
And if it wasn't for this so called..."filler",tell me,my friend, exactly how would you understand just how much Napoleon sucks and just how awesome Masons are?

>>7634675
>>7634694

socrates pls go

russian writers would get paid depending on the word count of a book but i don't think it applies to war and peace much.

>>7634694
Maketh thine self scarce, knave.

>>7634717
Don't compare this idiot to Socrates you fucking faggot.

File: socrates.png (407KB, 506x691px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 506x691px

>>7634727

awww shieeet, this nigga destroying average /lit/ losers left and right

>>7634699

Take it as an invitation to thought on why length is necessary in a work like War and Peace, and what it accomplishes. Then try writing your thoughts.

>>7634722

Consumeth mine faeces, faggoth.

>>7634727

Upset your middlebrow sensibilities, does it :^)?

Which of the Socratic Dialogues is your favourite? Oh right, haven't read them, just posturing.

>>7634811
You're right. I'm convinced War and Peace is bad because some idiot has /r/logicalfallacies opened in another tab.

>>7634817
>>>/virgin/

>>7634694

Nobody's 'regurgitating dogma'. You're echoing things you've heard elsewhere, but you're really just a field African-American, that needs its skull boiled clean for me to use as a pisspot.

>>7634817
You haven't presented us with a clear position yet, either. Please give us some of the analysis which has caused you to adopt the posture that you've chosen regarding War & Peace. You should probably be quite thorough, given that you're opposed to generations of mainstream scholarship.

Once you've outlined some of your reasoning, there are many of us here who would like to engage in a dialogue with you. However, it really falls upon you to provide us a meaningful starting point, since this is your thread.

>>7634817

It's not, though. It's just impatience. Why length is neccesary implies there's some shorter length that War and Peace is in excess of. War and Peace is the length it is. There's no economy option.

/lit/ isn't so insecure that we need to rise to the challenge of someone who won't challenge himself.

>>7634849
My position is that it's what Virginia Woolf (if a plebeian like you had heard of her) would call middlebrow -- it's a book enjoyed by the lower classes of society, oh, like you honey. MWAH.

>>7634817
it's almost like you think "War & Peace is sooo long!" is something new, instead of being the most famous characteristic of the worlds most famous novel.

>>7634879
low quality b8

>>7634822

You should look into New Sincerity. Sarcasm is unbecoming, and makes you seem like a brooding teenager.

>>7634832

Lost it at 17 :^)

>>7634849

Not even the OP. Just wanted to see if anyone could actually articulate independent thought. It seems they cannot. You yourself even refer to generations of scholars rather than thinking for yourself.

There is nothing but shitposting on this board. Nothing but endless repetition of established truths that are never questioned. Drones, the lot of us.

>>7634886
Hasn't put much of an effort in the whole thread. No idea how we have gotten this far.

>>7634879
>>7634886
It's not me. Doesn't surprise me that a pleb like you thinks it's legit :^)

>>7634884

It really isn't like that at all.

>>7634895
>implying i was implying it was you

wew that reading comprehension. are you really so desperate for attention? here's a (you) i guess, don't go spending it all at once now. there's a good chap.

File: aHA.gif (2MB, 304x226px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 304x226px

>>7634892
>17

Anyone have anything to say about War and Peace other than: filler, too long, critics like it?

i liked the bits where tolstoy literally just stopped the novel to tell us all about how all historians apart from him are wrong for the tenth time already

>>7634892

> Nothing but endless repetition of established truths that are never questioned.

What would be the point in my posting any original thoughts here, for free, without prestige, for others to ignore or rip off, when I can get published in the real world? Real talk: What kind of moron has a more than professional interest in debate? Debate isn't really worth anything; pretending that I give a fuck about what my contemporaries think is just the polite fiction that enables me to get paid to listen to myself talk about books.

>>7634397

Sorry, man, you're just wrong on this one. It's okay to admit that War & Peace isn't a novel you're comfortable with. It took me a long time to get through.

It's more like a historical fiction than a traditional novel. It gives people a glimpse into the time and place. Hell, I've heard some people say it's better than an encyclopedia because it works almost like a historical document interlaced with a journal interlaced with a drama.

I get you're probably trying to do a contrarian troll bit, but if even a little part of you reads War & Peace like you describe, I'd really suggest you try to reread it or read some more analysis of it with a more open mind.

This got way more replies than my Satanism thread.
>being butthurt on /lit/
>/lit/ being baited
>

>>7634975
your satanism thread is shit and you should kill yourself and go back to r/books, preferably in that order

>>7634975
No ones buying it, fag. You got buried

File: 1446783067874.jpg (178KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 960x720px

>>7634664
im fucking dying over here

>this is looong
>...and...boring....