>LET IT BE NOTED that not a single one of these boys bears any physical mark or injury despite being in a plane that crashed into dense island jungle. Golding wipes any emblem of the crash from his characters. Golding, though he makes frequent reference to the "gash" caused by the crash, wipes every last scrap of wreckage and any dead or wounded passengers off the island under the guise of a "storm" the night before.
>The tricky way in which Golding deploys the convention of the wreck without connecting it to the narrative, along with some other forced, stagey maneuvers (the choir marching down the beach), while they may serve Golding's philosophical aims, lend a sense of inauthenticity to the novel. This in a genre (the survival narrative) that earned its massive popular appeal (Robinson Crusoe) on the strength of its authenticity. Defoe, remember, first published the novel as a "true story." Here Golding again defies convention. His Lord of the Flies is totally artificial, but also very interesting, and interesting because of its artificiality.
>>9043811
Lord of the flies is just anarchism_irl
>>9043815
teenager pls go
continuing with my marginalia dump (btw if you don't produce mountains of marginalia while reading a book, you are a philistine)
>The physical evidence of the crash -- the "gash" in the forest -- is used primarily as a geographical marker, not a site of remembrance or eulogy. The boys behave as if gash is something that preceded them, and they arrived by some other route.
From the promontory, Jack points down at the scar in the trees and says, "That's where we landed." Landed? Why is Jack spinning the crash as a landing? Because that diction, that choice of "landed," is a subtle rhetorical trick that reinforces how Golding has already spun it.
> For the contemporary reader Lord of the Flies may seem to obvious an attempt to affirm the Hobbesian hypothesis that if you remove sociopolitical controls, base savagery would reign.
> Though stylistically somewhat sophisticated, the novel is clearly driven not be the characters but by Golding's rhetorical aim.
Hi /lit/,
recently I lost a text on which I had worked. I proceeded to rewrite it (better) and saved copies on cloud, my computer, and an USB key. The next day, when I wanted to re-read it, I realized it was gone from my computer, the cloud and my USB key. I have no rationnal explanation for this phenomenon but it got me thinking about the absurdity of trying to create something lasting in a perpetually changing world (in the buddhist sense of the phrase).
So, I wanna have a debate and read your opinions.
What is the purpose of writing (not communication based writing or any kind of direct, ephemeral writing, but a writing meant to last and transcend time) in the context of a world where all material structures are ephemeral? Is it an absurdity to try and create something that lasts, in a world where everything is constantly being transformed, destroyed and recreated?
The bouddhists say that the happiest writer is the one that never wrote anything at all.
I'm gonna take a break from writing and re-evaluate the purpose of such an action, but I would like to have your thoughts on this subject.
Will give mines, too.
4chan threads stay archived on desustorage forever
My thoughts are that trying to create a lasting medium in a fleeting world implies an inherent trust in the world and others, and maybe a need for it, too.
What I mean by that is that the very building of the kind of society that we have in the modern world rests upon the trust that others will continue your work and that, togeter, you can defeat the fatality of time or, to use a phrase from pink floyd, to "catch up with the sun".
However, to what extent is our action a choice? Certainly, we need this structure raised against time, as we could not live without it in our current society. Tribal societies are different. They transmit a form of knowledge and have such a relation with the world that they hardly need man-made pseudo-eternal structures.
Nothing ever written will last forever, nor should it. It will be destroyed and eventually forgotten, inevitably. So, what is the purpose of pseudo-eternal writing? Necessarily, it has a rather immediate purpose. To make money, express an emotion, communicate a thought, or even simply be a reminder of a certain thing.
It can also be used to create a certain experience and shape reality.
However, I beleive that in order to be independent and therefore free, writing should never be a need. To need a pseudo-eternal structure is absurd. To use one can be coherent.
I don't want to be a writer. I may write, but I will never, ever, consider myself a writer and I will try my best to write, if I want to, but never to need to.
>>9043848
I thought about that. I could potentially use that in the future but, as I said, I'm taking a break from writing in a lasting purpose for some time.
What are the obvious aesthetic or technical characteristics in Nietzsche's poetry and prose writings?
>My sense of style, for the epigram as a style, was awakened almost instantly when I came into contact with Sallust
>compact, severe, with as much substance as possible, a cold sarcasm against 'beautiful words' and 'beautiful sentiments'.
How does one write like that?
Can you or someone post some of his poems in this thread?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3DxMc2fQgO4
>tfw you're a better musician than Nietzsche
tfw no shitty poetry gf
tfw typing words into a box
tfw waiting for the sun to come up
tfw neoptism could publish this as a poem in 2013
tfw the bubble on our generational poetry has already burst and itself has become cynical and inwardly tainted and rotten
tfw smoking and reading the same book I read in 2013 and feeling different and not at all taken back to a better version of a different time
tfw my coffee has gone cold
tfw I enjoyed seeing another shitty writer take my work to prop up her own garbage because someone finally acknowledged my work in any context as valuable
tfw I haven't made anything new in two years
tfw typing words in a box
tfw reading poetry in another language to reclaim a sense of being alone in the world
tfw chinese
tfw the white noise of the city will never sound as real as the ocean
tfw longing
tfw no shitty alone gf
tfw no one to kiss your legs
tfw no sand to write in
tfw the sun still hasn't risen
tfw the encroaching daylight is indistinguishable from the light pollution of a city
tfw these words too will be stolen
tfw out of cigarrettes
tfw age
tfw it is not it will never be again but it will always be this way
tfw the latter is much more difficult
tfw less lights than before
tfw it will get colder after the sun rises
tfw you will never
tfw there isn't any insight to gain from the fact that all train tracks, subways, metros all sound the same regardless of country or destination
tfw I may never go back to Singapore
tfw the glance
tfw no warm concrete
Wah
wah
wah
>>9043693
Haruhi Suzumiya is a shit franchise and you should feel bad for making this thread.
>go to bagel shop
>get plain bagel, toasted, egg, bacon, well done, sliced in two parts
>server hands me my order in a forceful gesture and I can't help but imagine my sandwhich sliding and disengaging from its allignment
>$8.95
>Walking home
>Feel heat rapidly escaping thin paper bag
>A pedestrian looks me directly in the eyes
>The sidewalk is uneven
>>9043618
>>Feel heat rapidly escaping thin paper bag
the fucking worst
>"we'll eat when we get home"
was a fucking nightmare when I was a kid.
No Trump, no KKK, no fascist USA!
>>9043618
>$8.95
Cool 1000% profit for them I guess. God damn.
Zizek: Speaks multiple languages fluently, extremely familiar with huge amounts of works of art and their analysis, dove head first in to philosophy at a young age and has been a philosophical researcher for many decades, charismatic and funny, strong level of historical and political knowledge, embraces both high and low culture
Chomsky: Probably every STEMfag would admit he has a first rate analytical mind that they would consider extremely intelligent. Extremely good memory. Innovative linguist. Been researching political and societal issues for decades.
You'd have to be a major troll to think they're not highly intelligent. Now let's see the ENTIRE result of their LIFE'S WORK in Humanities / Philosophy / Social Sciences (ignoring chomsky's linguistics stuff).
Zizek: Hegelian and Lacanian BS that sounds so le deep, overdefined bullshitty unfalsifiable politics / society related nonsense.
Chomsky: "This country you think is good has done bad stuff. These countries you barely hear about have had bad stuff happen in them"
Why THE FUCK do people think that non-trivial insights can be gained outside of STEM? It's UN FUCKING BELIEVABLE to think that this could happen. It has NEVER happened.
Well, name some non-trivial insights in STEM.
Is that's all you got from them you are probably the one with a futil mind.
>Both are rich as fuck
>Chomsky is a millionaire living in one and working in another expensive architectural wonder in NY
>Zizek takes vactions to Dubai and other glamourous places
>Hangs out and is constantly namedropped by celebrities
>So is Chomsky btw
>My uncle studied engineering
>Has had the same job since he was 20
really shudders your udders
Redpill me on Vox Day
>>9043466
Mediocre genre author figured he'd attention whore by stirring up controversy. Nothing to see here.
>>9043466
He's theology is heretical. Specifically his belief in open theism.
>>9043466
Clutches low hanging fruit for easy attention and book sales. Hurr durr SJWs are destroying western civilisation and free speech. Yes, we know.
People act like Dostoevsky is too over-the-top and Tolstoy is perfect, but half of Anna Karenina is a pointless soap opera. I've read it four times and each time I care less about Anna and Vronsky.
The first ten times you read a book don't count. Keep going then you'll understand the book.
TBK is a masterpiece but it is 10 times the soap opera to Anna Karenina. Leo Tolstoy is an infinitely better writer than Dostoevsky.
>>9043447
Have you tried reading the the other half?
Post books that perfectly capture the geography and sense of your country/city/region
Or what?
>tfw London commuter belt
Uh... something by Ballard, maybe. Although I can't think of any books set in the cultural desert that surrounds London.
>women can;t wr-
Northanger Abbey was better tbqh familia
>>9043309
Pride and Prejudice was 400 pages of shit.
A 19th century Sex and the City at best.
American /lit/ > British /lit/
>>9043274
We are the Nu Americana
Post 1776 this is true.
>>9043274
>>9043286
cute
What are some of the biggest mindfuck books you've read?
>>9043251
Everybody poops
Women and Men.
>>9043300
Women don't
i have to choose 3 of those. can't be from the same author, need to be from two different time periods and can't be the same style (indicated by the single letter after the title).
help me choose, lit!
King Lear, Sound and the Fury and Leaves of Grass for quality, Doctor Faustus, Old Man and the Sea and Leaves of Grass for ez mode.
which one of the Harry Potter books is your favourite?
>>9043112
is this the call that saved J.K.Rowling?
>>9043114
>he doesn't know that bogdanoff gave money to rowling for her books
that's the call that saved western literature
>>9043112
I think that Goblet of Fire was the best with the plot twist of Barry Jr.
That's something you don't see everyday