Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 2221. page

File: viking_pepe.jpg (54KB, 466x411px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 466x411px

>decide to read some Norse mythology
>pick up the Prose Edda
>Prologue:

>In the beginning God created heaven and earth and all those things which are in them; and last of all, two of human kind, Adam and Eve, from whom the races are descended. And their offspring multiplied among themselves and were scattered throughout the earth.

>Near the earth's centre was made that goodliest of homes and haunts that ever have been, which is called Troy, even that which we call Turkland. This abode was much more gloriously made than others, and fashioned with more skill of craftsmanship in manifold wise, both in luxury and in the wealth which was there in abundance. There were twelve kingdoms and one High King, and many sovereignties belonged to each kingdom; in the stronghold were twelve chieftains. These chieftains were in every manly part greatly above other men that have ever been in the world. One king among them was called Múnón or Mennón; and he was wedded to the daughter of the High King Priam, her who was called Tróán; they had a child named Trór, whom we call Thor.

Why did Sturluson make Thor a human, from Troy, and not even the son of Odin? Why is the Judeo-Christian creation myth in here? WTF is this mess?

File: master_of_puppets_3d_album_by_cubicalmember-d4ry641.jpg (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

Give me the Master of Puppets of literature

File: 1482794194293.jpg (80KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 600x600px

Do you actually discuss literature with anyone IRL?

None of my friends are readers in the sense that I am. Many of them don't read at all, some (despite being adults) read lots of YA romance, and one exclusively reads eastern mythological texts.

Do you talk about literature with people or is it all just shitposting?

File: download.jpg (10KB, 185x272px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 185x272px

Is any other novel a better example of a meme?

I just finished GR. It wasn't the worst thing ever but holy crap was it overhyped. It had a lot of legitimately humorous, impressive, or moving scenes but there is no connecting tissue in between. 60% of the scenes in the book were just narratively isolated, grotesque, or thematically irrelavant. Again, not horrible.

I'm not some STEM pleb who just hopped in the deep end, here, I've read a lot of bizarre, long, and complex stuff but none of those things were bizarre, long, and complex just for the sake of it--just to be the "ultimate" postmodern novel. The style of a novel should entice, manipulate, guide, and provoke the reader; not berate them. "Blood Meridian," for example, is a long, dense, and stylistically obscure book that nonetheless uses these tools to draw the reader into a sense of desolation and ultimately deliver a powerful apocalyptic meditation on the evil of man.

I would be willing to bet that well over 50% of the people who have picked up GR haven't finished it and over 50% just pretend to like/"get" it because they seem dumb if they don't. The very definition of a meme book. I think when it came out it was so impenetrable that there was an academic race to comprehend it and people needed to act they were mining greater and greater depths from it in order to be smarter than the crowd. Eventually this behavior spread to an imageboard for anime enthusiasts and suddently you're a pseud.

Anyways, if you like GR feel free to expound on its virtues and if you didn't like it, explain why. I won't judge either of you guys, I'm just trying to get more perspectives here.

File: 1479425405222.jpg (387KB, 1200x874px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1200x874px

Is there any literature a fan of Black Metal would like? I'm not talking about artists' biographies, but something inspired by or related to the aesthetic.

File: IMG_1567.png (234KB, 476x545px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 476x545px

List the books you read in 2016:

File: 15451239_302755256785433_1160453550_n.jpg (18KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 600x600px

/lit/, i used to read a lot when i was younger, but mostly fiction.
Now i want to read some good and classic books and authors, how should i start?

File: American_progress.jpg (144KB, 1307x994px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1307x994px

Post your favorite American novels and poetry that are/is painfully underrepresented in the usual /lit/ thread.

File: 2962.jpg (46KB, 260x400px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 260x400px

What is the best translation of The Iliad for a first time reader?

File: H._P._Lovecraft,_June_1934.jpg (8KB, 220x272px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 220x272px

What is the medium opinion on the works of Lovecraft around here?
I commonly enjoy his shorter stories, but others seem like "normie-horror" material made to unnerve the housewives of his time.

File: IMG_20160822_132624.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

What university are you at, /lit/? What are you studying? What are you reading at the moment?

File: hume.jpg (41KB, 550x330px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 550x330px

Hey /his/, I am desperately in need some help making sense of the implications of Hume's proposed problem of induction and /his/ redirected me here.

Hume considers himself to be an empiricist as far as I know, but doesn't his criticism of induction undermine empiricism as a whole? If obtaining knowledge through induction is not logical, then the scientific method, based on empiricism is fundamentally flawed. I get that he says that it's our constant experience of impressions that allows us to form ideas and connect them (which demonstrates his empirical conviction; experience is key to forming ideas and obtaining knowledge) and relate them through the flawed concept of causality.

But again, the flawed concept of causality greatly undermines empiricism, so why is he considered to be an empiricist instead of a skeptic, since he attempts to undermine rationalism but also damages empiricism with his arguments, seemingly rejecting both? Is the fact that he said that we have to accept the limitations of induction and work with that the reason he is considered an empiricist instead of a skeptic?

Finally, which part of his proposed problem of induction undermines rationalism as he claims to be doing? Or does the undermining of rationalism stem EXCLUSIVELY from his ideas & impressions initial framework and not at all from his causality argument?

I feel like I've made a critical misunderstanding in my analysis of Hume and would greatly appreciate it if someone could detect and highlight it to me. Keep in mind I'm not studying philosophy in university, so if you have to introduce new terms to explain stuff please clarify what they mean or use terms that I can refer to online. Thanks in advance.

File: 1480289591193.jpg (22KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x400px

CRASH! We adopted a puppy. CRASH! My mail arrived. CRASH! Two cars outside narrowly avoided hitting each other.

File: books in trash.jpg (271KB, 683x1024px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 683x1024px

What does /lit/ do with books they have read?

Collect them? Throw them in the garbage? Donate?

File: lu0880b.gif (26KB, 651x1371px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 651x1371px

What's lit's oppinon on gregorian chant? Is it apocryptha? Is approved by the Pope? Is it opening hidden brainwaves when listenting so I can learn better? Will I learn latin if I go through every single one of them?