Thread replies: 10
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: annoyed_alien.jpg (11KB, 251x242px) Image search:
[Google]
11KB, 251x242px
Is anyone else seriously starting to dislike writing / literary culture and the denial of its limitations? When I see po faced and pretentious writing (whether fiction or non fiction) it reminds me that writers are like eunuchs compared to doers.
This wouldn't even be an issue if people stopped pretending that, "omg books are my WORLD! I luv books! They let you experience EVERYTHING about the human condition!". There is just a pretentious and cringe worthy culture around books. Reading 100 books about maths (by writers, or mathematicians writing for lay people) will be less mathematically edifying than spending 1 % of the time doing maths. I know you guys will try to conflate reading (books) with reading as a means to an end.
I know this example will be mocked but i don't care. When i see journalists asking sports players to talk about matches i just cringe. It's like a blind person asking what something looks like. I understand that this stuff is necessary for marketing and the human drama but there is a cringe worthy disconnect between the doer and the talker / writer.
Clearly we are still overly influenced by olden times when being literate automatically made you a top 10 % intellectual. And all you had to do was read the Bible and Greeks and spend your days creating an unfalsifiabile branch of philosophy and theology.
>>
Literature is for neurotypical normgroids. Non fiction master race here.
>>
Terrible underage (sophomoric) writing style obsessed with slurring people as "cringe" and "pretentious" rather than focusing on making the point that real experience is a viable/superior way to gain knowledge compared to reading. You immediately start throwing shit at these cringey sports players rather than continuing up on your sole example of reading mathematics compared to doing
>>
>>2516565
Nonfiction writing is just a way to communicate ideas. It's not really writing you're pissed at, you just don't like most people's ideas. Join the club, it also consists of everybody else in the world.
>>
If someone values the mental and imaginary sphere as much as the material sphere than reading is just as valuable as tangible experience.
It's about preference, mate.
>>
>>2516565
Consider yourself lucky, at least you can read, unlike me.
>>
Now while I agree with the basic premise of the OP, that reading fiction is kind of worthless, writing on the other hand can be good for the one doing the writing.
To use another sports analogy. It's like the difference between watching and practicing a sport. But in order to write well one has to read a few books, so there you have it. The functionality of reading fiction is to learn write fiction.
>>
>>
I am a Very Serious Person and thus resits the human urge for creativity, fiction and artifice. Because I am a Very Serious Person, I will deny a fundamental aspect of my humanity.
Of course, reading in and of itself it not necessarily any better than doing anything else. To 'do' mathematics (or read a textbook on it, and do practice sets) is indeed better than reading Godel, Escher, Bach. Reading quality like Shakespeare, Joyce, Celan or Rimbaud will do much more for you than reading Gaiman, Tolkien or Pratchett.
As for the sports example, good sports journalist often show a much deeper understanding than the actual players. From actually having to graft and come to the game from a much less 'natural' level.
Basically OP, you're chatting a lot of shit with a teeny, not necessarily easily extrapolated grain of truth.
Thread posts: 10
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1