Why do people keep pretending like the savages who lived 3000 years ago could possibly offer modern man anything in terms of wisdom? Not even trying to stir shit up, the idea that great greek philosophers would amount to anything but fedora tipping highschool neets in modern age is absurd
>>8357085
>its another historicist // baiting episode
>>8357085
this BATE > your bait
The idea that OP would ammount to anything but a fedora tipping highschool neet in modern age is absurd
Anyone here have a /lit/ job? I've just started working as a proofreader. Bit antisocial, but you do get paid to just sit and read all day, so I imagine it'd be perfect for some of you guys.
>>8357068
Nope, I work as asset protection.
Where do you work if you don't mind me asking? I just submitted a bunch of job applications to various publishing houses.
>>8357145
My dad is an editor/publisher, and up til now has been a one-man operation, but has too much work at the moment so has taken me on to help. So I got lucky, basically. Doubt it'll turn into a permanent job because I don't think he's looking to expand, but it's a nice earner over summer.
I am testing a new thing to read books.
I will be printing them by myself, downloading them via pirating etc.
This way I have the best position both in $ and designing as I want. I leave big margins before printing so I can take notes etc.
I want to try it out first by printing short books, max 20 pages. They can be guides, short stories etc, anything that's inspiring. Any recommendations?
stuff like booklets and things like that
just need names
>>8357003
I do it in my job
Free laser printer that print in both sizes automatically. A3 pages to spend less in paper and I have a machine to put rings.
It is easy to use a kindle, tablet or phone, but I need paper...
>>8357025
what does that machine called?
also any suggestions to read first? very short?
>book spoils other book
You can't really "spoil" literature, so you must be talking about genre fiction.
In which case: grow up.
>book spoils the ending of an unrelated earlier book by the same author
>>8356935
I see this repeated now and then on this board and have yet to see any argument why. It seems that people put a lot of imaginary baggage on the word "spoil"
What are your opinions on this book, /lit/? Why is it considered great?
>>8356900
Go read it, make up your own mind, and then make a post about what you think and invite us to participate you literal shit of a person.
>>8356900
I just read it. I thought it was good because I liked Meursault as a character and I thought the story was good. Similar reasons to why I like genre fiction, and elitists will probably judge me for that but they can fuck right off.
>>8356900
It's well crafted but I wouldn't call it profound. It is very good though because it crafts in theme in a nifty and concise way makng you ponder the themes which are presented in the book. In merely 120 or so pages, Camus manages to make you ponder the meaning of life and the nature of good and evil.
What does /lit/ think about pic related?
Its dumbed down as shit but I found it useful. Also it's probably too long. I recommend it if you feel that you're not getting everything out of the books you're reading.
Bump
this book also intrigues me but i don't know if it's worth it or not
>>8357011
just tell us some shit from it
>So I told John to write a poem with Satan as the hero.. he actually did it the absolute madman!
There's nothing heroic about Satan in Paradise Lost. He's just an over-proud asshole.
Someone post the Andrew Marvell greentext about paradife loft
>paradife loft
I actually read a relatively modern book in French where they had decided to use a font that turned s into f, it was torture
The Clod & the Pebble
"Love seeketh not itself to please,
Nor for itself hath any care,
But for another gives its ease,
And builds a Heaven in Hell's despair."
So sung a little Clod of Clay
Trodden with the cattle's feet,
But a Pebble of the brook
Warbled out these metres meet:
"Love seeketh only self to please,
To bind another to its delight,
Joys in another's loss of ease,
And builds a Hell in Heaven's despite."
If it's egotistical it's shit
>>8356729
Hegel claims that subject-object identity (the identity of subject and object is realized only in self-consciousness because only in self-consciousness are the subject and object of consciousness one and the same), such self-consciousness, exists perfectly only in love. What he means is that in love the self (the subject) finds itself in the other (the object) as the other finds itself in the self. In the experience of love subject and object, self and other, realize their natures through one another, and moreover each of them recognizes itself only through the other. Hence there is subject-object identity because there is a single structure of self-consciousness holding between self and other: the self knows itself in the other as the other knows itself in the self.
Further, love involves not only a moment of identity, but also a moment of difference; it is unity-in-difference. There is also difference in love because by its very nature it consists in appreciating the other just because it is an other; love is possible only through the mutual repsect between equal and independent partners. The self does not love the other if it attempt to dominate and subordinate the other to itself.
Love is thus the paradoxical process whereby the self both loses itself (as an individual) and finds or gains itself (as a part of a wider whole). Love contains therefore the moment of self-surrender and also of self-discovery. There is a moment of self-surrender in love because the self loses itself by renouncing self-interest as its ultimate value, and by ceasing to define itself in opposition to others. There is also a moment of self-discovery because in love the self also finds itself in and through the other; it sees that it is no longer something oposed to the other but the unity of itself with the other.
if time can cure love, was it love at all
I can order one of these right now.
Which should it be?
Put the money in my PayPal account
>>8356599
I vote for oblomov
>>8356599
Let's be honest, anon, you're probably not going to make it through any of those.
Though, Infinite Jest is always the correct option.
Anyone read this bad boy? Thoughts?
>>8356570
I've never read Bernhard but I hear Gaddis was a fan so he should at least be worth a look. Which of his books do you recommend aside from this one?
>>8356588
I've read only this one and loved it. You won't be disappointed.
I might sound deluded now, but it's similar to The Waves in the sense that a narrator is reminiscing about his friends and the way they shaped his character. The whole book is one long interior monologue.
It's very bleak and often humorous in its bleakness.
>>8356570
I liked it a lot. It's the only Bernhard I've read.
I like to read book about spongebob
>>8356441
what a funny thread :D
sage and report
>>8356445
Why?
>>8356441
didnt even know anyone else owned that
How come people always talk about The Castle and The Trial but Amerika is rarely discussed? I'm currently halfway through it and it's a fantastic novel. Granted, it does feel a little different from the other two but it is incredibly charming.
I plan on reading it soon. How is it different from the other two and Is there a short story from Kafka thats simular to this book?
>>8356361
It has the same theme of a character being obstructed from his main goal by different circumstances but it's generally flows a lot less abstract than the previous two.
>Dat chapter 3 of Karl exploring the house
>>8356368
Also it feels a lot of it was inspired by Dickens work, no surprise giving how Kafka was a fan, especially one scene where Karl gives his name and it reminds me of the famous scene of Pip going into the origins of his name from Great Expectations.
Am I canon yet?
Did you sell a third copy already?
No one cares, shill.
>>8356288
Counting free and paid downloads together I've moved 200 something copies at this point. I assume most of them haven't been read though since there aren't really any reviews from nearly all of those people.
Do you want to believe in magic, /lit/? Couldn't this world be so much more lovely if it were so?
I know a lot of you object to magic in literature, but why? Do you see it as a shortcut? As something not reflective of the true human experience? Could you envision a magic that was?
I've read my share of occult philosophy, and though it's not the most thought provoking, something about it tugs at my heart and fills me with a somber hope that there is some kernel of truth there. When you get into it, the lines between the mystic and the psychological begin the blur and you really can envision a way for these notions of magic and demons and ritual that can coexist with a world of relative order.
Don't you ever wish there was a little more chaos at the heart of things?
he Art of Magick and the Magick of Art - Miles Hingston
As mentioned previously, our brains are all about finding and decoding patterns, we are designed to think symbolically. Consider then that as children we have been taught what symbols to use to construct our model of the World. We are taught how to “spell”, or rather be put under the spell of language
Words are also symbols, when we think about things we are really thinking about the construction and interaction of various symbols, it is a code. This is the foundation of magical practice, language is an esoteric science first and foremost
Reality is at a very deep level a set of interrelated and self-referential symbols. We interpret these symbols and therefore explore reality linked to a set of codes, not all of them are conscious. Some codes have a stronger claim than other..
...Changing those codes makes us see things in a different way because we bring new symbols in contact with us. The semiotic theory of magic states that a person is able to effect communication in their universe by changing the symbols they interact with. The magickian seeks either a psychological change within themselves or an environmental change by changing their cultural coded symbols. As Philip K. Dick reminds us, “the linking and unlinking of objects is actually a language”.
>>8356298
I don't believe in a singular or unified magic, not in the "chaos magick" sense where you can will anything you desire into manifestation, but rather that the beating heart of magic is the personal and the ritualistic.
>>8356306
I agree with this analysis overall. I have considered magic in a semiotic/deconstruction framework and it meshes well with my critical theory education.
I'm trying to read the social contract in french and I've ran into a sentence I can't wrap my head around
"Ne pouvant se considérer que sous un seul et même rapport il est alors dans le cas d'un particulier contractant avec soi-même : par où l'on voit qu'il n'y a ni ne peut y avoir nulle espèce de loi fondamentale obligatoire pour le corps de peuple' pas même le contat social."
Can a french anon help me understand this?
>>8356236
>reading philosophy in a language you can't fully comprehend
Nice même.
It's saying 'stop reading this fedoralord political philosophy written by a hypocritical asshole and perhaps even skip the entirety of the enlightenment because virtually all of it is as self-gratifying as the Rouss'
I hope that helped.
>>8356236
literally to blame for giving women and nonwhites the vote. he started the nonsense about them having moral worth