Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 158. page

>>9971610
How about go fuck yourself, hows that for a recommendation.
The board is called /lit/ thats short for literature not pulp garbage

>>9971610
Dresden Files.
Worm
Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality
Luminosity

>>9971621
Why are science fiction and fantasy threads the most popular threads on this board then? Checkmate, triggered virgin. Fuck outta here

Well, read the myths and go play a real shin meegomy tansei

>>9971624
Ah, a classic.
Well, I should've stated any besides that one, since I already know of it haha.

File: 1503998330136-lit.png (461KB, 640x1000px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 640x1000px

I just ordered a one-volume Summa Theologiae edited by a Timothy McDermott. Is the Summa as good as everyone says?

>>9971511
Dune. Too easy.

>>9971516
You didn't mean to say a Song of Ice and Fire?

>>9971511
Harry Potter.

Girls are HOT

it's fucking great

>>9971502
>Trying to hide the fact that he's secretly a faggot

>>9971472

I personally take him seriously. That being said, Being and Nothingness isn't the easiest read in the world, so many people probably just dropped it and moved onto whatever right-wing nutjob is "hot" at the moment

Existentialism isn't very popular on /lit/ for some reason.

>>9971487
Doesn't stop everyone from sucking Heidegger's dick, although that's probably cause the Nazi thing makes him memeable.

Watching porn in english

i checked this coursera courses

https://www.coursera.org/learn/english-composition

But im curious what others have to say

Bump for interest.

you're fucked

>>9971279
WTF.
Where do you store your books?

>>9971288
Inside on a shelf..

Contemporary I don't know.
But you may wanna look into Foucault

Isn't the entire continental tradition predicated on this idea?

>>9971305
Eh, not really. Certainly a lot of analytic philosophers seem to promote this idea, as to create a consistent Other of non-analytic philosophy that is supposed to be hegelian claptrap. But to think of "continental" philosophy as a single self-understood tradition doesn't really work, there are various schools and certainly not all of them think the history of philosophy should be relevant to the doing of philosophy.

>>9971239
gee, you really are a dingbat. the answer is yes to all of those things. mere mortals like us will never be qualified to "evaluate" shakespeare because we simply do not have the critical framework necessary to do so. all we can do is bask in his genius. uhhhh but anyway read De Quincy's "On the Knocking at the Gate in Macbeth." It's short and very important.

Shakespeare is considered the best both for individual quality and influence.
Debate on the former largely goes on whether the Sonnets Shakespeare or the Plays Shakespeare is better, but the Plays were quite a bit more influential.

Sometimes I'm unsure if Shakespeare was truly that mind-blowingly good, or if all of the critics and analysts have created a depth that wasn't initially there.

>>9971237
Sometimes I think there are way try hards in this board.

>>9971237
Where is this place? I want to be here. Someone ought to start a bookstore/library thread again because those always have the most beautiful images.

I would

remove "anathema" (why use that?) and use a phrase/word that evokes visceral feeling of "shock of cold"

fix the "shock of cold ... sickness" clause in general: it's split between dispassionate third-person narration ("remember, he has a sickness") and visceral feeling ("the SHOCK of cold made him feel like SHIT because he was already SICK!!!!!!!"). It straddles clinical description of character's situation + attempt to make reader experience the character's action, at the same time

"to swim upwards" has the same problem sorta. Is he coming to his senses, and then deciding (feeling an instinct, impulse? desperately resolving to do something..?), or are you just describing "what he did" from the third person?

also, "to swim upwards" isn't right if what you mean is "he did x in order to y."

also, put the second clause before the first, because it proceeds it temporally, logically, and narratively:
>Visceral shock of cold, exacerbating feeling of sick-weakness (?)
>RESULTS IN
>Snapping back to his senses (animal survival instinct?)
>RESULTS IN
>Desperation/resolve to escape the water
>RESULTS IN
>Decision to swim, or instinctive swimming, to the surface

>>9971234
>Why use that
well I think I used it wrong, to be honest, which is why Im taking it out.

To rephrase, the shock of the cold water temporarily removed all the effects of sickness on him, he regains his senses from the delirium of the nausea, then swims upwards to not drown.
I am describing what he did in the third person.

Forgive me, I am amateur as fuck.
I guess the reader is meant to empathize with his own feelings, so the tone I want is visceral, yes.

Also thank you very kindly for the feedback.

>>9971234
"His head hit the water, and the sudden shock of cold overwhelmed his sickness as he turned his body to swim to the surface"

Am I going in the right or wrong direction here?

>>9971180

I think you can throw Nietzsche in there too, he had a tendency to contradict himself a lot. I know he's regarded as a nihilist, but he's really, really, really obsessed with God and Jesus

Probably not, as analytic philosophers are mostly bad writers. It will make you a better thinker.

>>9971137
No, most analytic philosophy is written 'badly' from the viewpoint of a person who's looking for something like literature.

>>9971137
No, it may even make you worse