>that's very Wallacian
>>8793051
*orgasm*
this post is very [OMITTED]... kafkaesque...
Wallatian
>I want the Guns N' Roses audience
>>8792997
>dfw John Jeremiah Sullivan wanted both the GnR audience and the Wallace audience with that Axl Rose piece he wrote
>>8792997
>I want the homosexual cowboy audience
what did Deef mean by this?
>>8792997
He got me
is the secret to good writing confidence?
If you get to cocky you'll write shit and like it
Be the most severe of critics to your own work
>>8792947
no, thats the secret to get pussy
I think it's being an egomaniac with low self esteem, being a crippling introvert who can really only communicate through writing, and projecting all of your problems into your work.
Recommend me a book that encapsulates a similar feel to this recording:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feu2owd0MsY
Paradiso
The Desert Fathers. Read them atop Mt. Athos in solitude.
>>8792939
https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/cuckold
hey /lit/,
this is my very first time post on this board! i'm very excited!
i've been writing sad, amateurish & sappy poems for about a year now and i've finally compiled a bunch of them into a "collection" that's actually just a hastily made .pdf file.
i want to put them out where someone will hopefully read them, and my question is, is there a group on /lit/ that does that kind of thing?
kind of like how a netlabel on bandcamp puts out people's albums, i'm looking for a group or collective somewhere who will "publish" my shitty poetry.
thx for your time,
c.w.
>>8792882
posting*
my bad, don't want to seem like i don't PROOFREAD or anything haha
If this were real life right now I would rape you.
I think this is just the sort of young blood we need on this board.
Post a poem or three, let's see what you got.
>"Telling instead of showing" throughout almost the entire book
Literally unreadable.
>No discernible talent throughout almost the entire book
Literally unreadable.
>>8792854
is that really what you got from the book? holy shit
How's your freshman year treating you, OP? Make any friends yet?
>buy a used book
>only the first chapter has notes and highlighted phrases
>buy a used book
>there's squashed bugs between the pages
>>8792834
>don't finish a book
>underline some shit and dogear pages in the last half so if someone comes across it when I'm dead they won't think I'm a quitter pleb
learned this after going through muh grandpa's books after he died, he fucking never completed them, always quit like halfway in.
>>8792834
>buy a used copy of Consider Phlebas for £3
>Find a £5 note used as a bookmark.
mfw when literature has made me more money than the average aspiring author on this forum.
What was the point of this?
I'm just finishing it now and I'm not sure what to think. It's not bad, it goes down easy, but there's really nothing great or memorable about it either, it just sort of passed though me. Didn't even have as much style as Slaughterhouse Five. Vonnegut's OK but I think I'm done with him.
Also, it's making fun of scientism and religion you doof.
Vonnegut was just having a laugh.
>>8792868
Nah, he's mocking anyone who blindly follows any belief.
How much would you charge for writing a ten page essay for someone?
>>8792821
$10,000.
I don't want to write a 10 page essay for someone.
>>8792821
Dollar or two a page. If you're a decent writer you can bullshit a few pages on any subject without saying much at all.
$100
1. Be Writerly: If your writing is too natural, then there is no way it is scholarly.
2. Sprawl: Content doesn't matter, it's all about size. Critics are impressed by big books, so brevity should be dismissed.
3. Equivocate: If it doesn't make sense, there can always be a good excuse. Truth can always be distorted as long as it makes the writer sound good. For example, the plot isn't important because the lack of plot is what's important.
4. Mystify: If people think that your writing is smarter than their writing, then they will respect your writing. If you sound smart (and definitely if you are published) then you must possess a brilliant mind.
5. Keep Sentences Long: If the sentence is not long and boring, then it is definitely not literature.
6. Repeat yourself: Repetition of words is important. If you don't mention your subject enough times, then the reader may not know what you are talking about. You may also use synonyms to show that you know how to use a thesaurus, and thus, must be an intelligent writer.
7. Pile on the Imagery: Your writerly credentials will bloom to greatness if your ability to tie together multiple similes and metaphors like the wooden pieces of a Lincoln log set, never disintegrate from the fiery visage of the sun. The more literary devices that you can throw together, the better the writing.
8. Archaize: If thine style of writing reflects an age long gone, and a world unfamiliar to the modern reader, then thou art indeed a master of the quill and the ink. This is very similar to rule number four, except you must write as if you are stuck in the past, rather than stuck in a dictionary.
9. Bore: The word boring may as well be a synonym to the word scholarly. Along the lines of rule number one, you cannot write naturally, or make your words interesting. It is simply not scholarly. People are not supposed to be able to understand your writing, they are only supposed to realize that your writing is brilliant, because it just might be the cure for insomnia.
10. Play the part: Remember to be as you write, scholarly, literate, practically a god. You must understand that when you seem smart, when you seem to believe in yourself, others will do the same, because, how could someone that is so smart and so pompous be wrong?
Don't forget
11. Be Ironic: Make sure to keep a cynical distance from your art. The more ironic you are, the better, because if you were to have strong views someone might *gasp* disagree with you and call you a tryhard. Don't risk it.
12. My dairy farm.
13. My diarrhea farts.
Name me a more patrician author than Edward Gibbon.
>protip: you can't
This is seriously some of the most comfy prose in English. Get in here you gorgeous faggots and talk about the fall of the Roman Empire. Ed is laying it down.
1/3
It is sufficiently known that the odious appellation of Tyrant was often employed by the ancients to express the illegal seizure of supreme power, without any reference to the abuse of it. Several of the pretenders who raised the standard of rebellion against the emperor Gallienus were shining models of virtue, and almost all possessed a considerable share of vigour and ability. Their merit had recommended them to the favour of Valerian, and gradually promoted them to the most important commands of the empire. The generals who assumed the title of Augustus were either respected by their troops for their able conduct and severe discipline, or admired for valour and success in war, or beloved for frankness and generosity.
2/3
The field of victory was often the scene of their election; and even the armourer Marius, the most contemptible of all the candidates for the purple, was distinguished however by intrepid courage, matchless strength, and blunt honesty. His mean and recent trade cast, indeed, an air of ridicule on his elevation; but his birth could not be more obscure than was that of the greater part of his rivals, who were born of peasants, and enlisted in the army as private soldiers. In times of confusion every active genius finds the place assigned him by nature; in a general state of war military merit is the road to glory and to greatness.
3/3
Of the nineteen tyrants Tetricus only was a senator; Piso alone was a noble. The blood of Numa, through twenty-eight successive generations, ran in the veins of Calphurnius Piso, who, by female alliances, claimed a right of exhibiting in his house the images of Crassus and of the great Pompey. His ancestors had been repeatedly dignified with all all the honours which the commonwealth could bestow; and, of all the ancient families of Rome, the Calphurnian alone had survived the tyranny of the Cæsars. The personal qualities of Piso added new lustre to his race. The usurper Valens, by whose order he was killed, confessed, with deep remorse, that even an enemy ought to have respected the sanctity of Piso; and, although he died in arms against Gallienus, the senate, with the emperor’s generous permission, decreed the triumphal ornaments to the memory of so virtuous a rebel.
All right, that's all for now.
Started reading today and I'm about 30% into it.
Not trying to insult anyone, but does it get good at any point? So far it's just a rather dull (though concise and reasonably well written) list of things that happened in this man's life... which is very little.
>>8792682
Pathetic fucking ADHD generation can't even finish Stoner in one session without having to come to /lit/ to pontificate about it.
Just fucking finish it.
>>8792694
Right buddy, but does it get good? I'm just asking if it's just a long list, because that's all it is so far.
I'd finish it in one sitting if I were enjoying it.
>>8792703
During the time it took you to write your reply to me, you could have finished Stoner.
Dan Schneider claims to have written 1500 genuinely great poems. By comparison, the greatest published poet of all time, Rainer Maria Rilke, has only 77: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJrj7WvTt8Y
This makes Dan Schneider a literary genius the likes of which the world has never before seen. Hard to believe? Read his poems and judge for yourself: http://cosmoetica.com/Poetrylinks.htm
I'd link a specific one, but that shouldn't matter, as they're all supposedly great. His wife, of course, is the second greatest poet of all time: http://www.cosmoetica.com/Jessica%20Schneider.htm
He also likes to improve poems written by other authors by cutting out unnecessary lines. He performs such excisions on such beloved greats as Yeats, Eliot, Keats, Frost, Ashbery and plenty of others: http://www.cosmoetica.com/TOP.htm
For some examples of his criticism, see him take 2/3 of the meme trilogy to task:
http://www.cosmoetica.com/B1277-DES888.htm
http://www.cosmoetica.com/B326-DES266.htm
He's a bit kinder to Ulysses, but also considers it extremely overrated, and feels that the film adaptation is superior: https://web.archive.org/web/20111006165411/http://www.noripcord.com/reviews/film/bloom
He also does interviews with various people, but I'll only link to this one with famed anime voice actor and Star Trek fan film director Vic Mignogna, which I found quite surreal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEFwT-ko9Ac
In a similar vein, here are Dan Schneider's thoughts on Dan Schneider: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IdJ83GP5cg
So, what are /lit/'s thoughts? Have we all been missing out on a once-in-a-millennium genius, or is he just a phony? BTW I am not Dan Schneider, but you can assume I am if you want to.
Not this guy again
He's a rambling idiot
>>8792641
I'll agree he's a narcissist, but for the sake of argument, may you explain?
Dan 'Dick like a tin can' Schneider
Dan 'Get in the van' Schneider
Dan 'The Hymen divider' Schneider
etc.
So, i bought a Kindle, downloaded everything from lovecraft and now i don't know where to go. Can you reccomend me the best occult/horror/mystery books you know. Anything with a sense of a bigger darker meaning goes too.
>>8792554
>i bought a Kindle
>>8792560
Got tired of spending money on books, now i can download everything for free.
>>8792554
Because Lovecraft's work is almost entirely short stories I'd recommend other collections that are considered essential horror reading.
>Edgar Allan Poe's works
Lovecraft idolized the man and his best tales give a real horrific face to insanity, still worth to read him because he shaped as many people as HPL has.
>M.R. James' Ghost Stories of an Antiquary
He's considered to have perfected the classical ghost story. Perfectly marries the familiar and the horrific, great for this time of year.
>Thomas Ligotti's Songs for a Dead Dreamer or Grimscribe: His lives and works
Very cerebral horror, his stuff is dense and he goes on musings over philosophy, the metaphysical and his dark creations. Hailed as a genius by many a established author.
>Clive Barker's Books of Blood
Supposedly game changing by the time it came out. Haven't finished it but I can say that Barker writes with lots of style, pretty much grabbing your from the get go. It's cited countless times as a masterpiece so might as well check it out.
The saddest thing about the philosophy and politics threads on this board is that with the exception of a few, you are not only wrong, but are not even knowledgeable enough that one could even say you have an opinion. It is so obvious that so many of you have never cracked open a book—except for one you saw posted here, and i do mean one—and instead have chosen a few opinion pump websites to forge yourself on and use this place as your intellectual toilet when it all gets too backed up.
>>8792373
cool
"you cannot know nuffin"
t. le hemlock man
having/formulating opinions on things that does not concern you is stupid and a huge waste of time/effort