Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 3484. page

>>8229195
Let's just say he was redpilled to the maximum degree.

'Get women back in the fucking kitchen'
- BASED Schopenhauer

A profound influence on my thinking today.

"Bitches aint shit but hoes and tricks" - Bropenhauer

File: Panic.jpg (3KB, 82x119px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 82x119px

>mfw there are people on this board right now who think he was wrong about any of it

>>8229189
i know there's an answer to this, he said it in an interview, but i forget. maybe i wont even submit this response. fuck it

>>8229189
well it's two capital letters spaced out. so what the fuck do you think?

>>8229200
I need to be hostile. I say jay are but I was just curious about you anons.

>>8229168
>reading proto nu-males

>>8229178
how is casanova a nu-male

>>8229188
Looks like a fag cuck

>>8229147
i've ordered several books from book depository before and they have always arrived reasonably promptly

also you're too lazy to even retitle a meme picture so fuck you basically

>>8229147
I've ordered some books from bookdepository and each time they arrived after only a month.

>>8229185
>only a month

i just go through various /lit/ charts i have saved lmao

>>8229124

Usually get it into my head that "I am going to read this book because of...". Also helps with not quitting for another book.

I go through my to-read list and just pick what I'm in the mood for.

>>8229117

Meme is just layman vernacular for a concept that has existed in philosophy for like a thousand years. Yes, that's how pleb you are.

>>8229129
Same could be said about a lot of things.

>>8229129
pleb or no, at least he's not a summer who needs to lurk mor

>>8229051

Never read it but can tell it's extremely pleb just from the title.
Serious books aren't titled this way.

#rare

I liked it

>>8229047
>the narrator is the protagonist

>>8229047

>The city is the protagnist

>>8229047
>the moon is the protagonist

it's a fairly reasonable stance to take.

File: 1457091626907.jpg (190KB, 1296x730px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 1296x730px

>>8229023
>believable characters

>>8229023
>it takes them out of the story, it takes breaks the reader's stream of consciousness.

He's right about characters tending to turn into ideograms rather than people if authors focus too much on the themes. However, being "taken out of the story" isn't really a problem for me. Books aren't video games. Recognizing themes is an important part of the reading process.

What would be the TV equivalent to Infinite Jest?

Man Seeking Woman is written by Simon Rich, a very funny writer in his own right. As for The Middle, I've never heard of it and I don't know why it referenced IJ.

>>8228992

One of the main character's in The Middle is obsessed with books and he gets Infinite Jest for Christmas in one episode

>>8228977
>with all the rad puppies and sad puppy stuff going on
what are you talking about
literary circles would only by accused of racism by people that would automatically accuse all educated or white people of racism

>>8228977
Probably not but it's 2016. Everything is racist now.

I do think its funny how often in fantasy the author inserts a civilization of black people on the periphary of the story, and their society is a flawless isolationist utopia.
Like the author is terrified of being called racist so he has black people in his world, but doesnt have black people in the story, if that makes sense.

If you're just in it for the plot and storytelling, why do you care what other criteria might go into picking books? If you had a room full of all of the best books in history and knew both that they were all literary the best books ever written and that you could only read a finite number of them, what would be the argument against reading only the ones that had blue covers? Or only the ones that are in the Realist mode? Or only books that are shorter than 300 pages? Or only the ones by women? Or only the ones by men? Why is one of these options okay but the rest are utterly unacceptable for a reading list?

Most people read based on aesthetics. And yet somehow we've ended up with a literary history and canon that predominantly celebrates white males. Maybe, somehow, that's not a coincidence? For example, maybe white males aren't the only ones to create texts of aesthetic worth but are mostly the only ones? Sounds reasonable.

After all, we're only reading books of aesthetic worth and it's mostly white men, and any argument that we should we read more women or brown people is met with the outrage and shouting about only reading books based on aesthetic worth. Or is that too much inductive logic?

Even if you walked into a library without having ever seen a book or read a word or heard someone talk about western literature in your entire life, pulled a random book off the shelf, and said "hey, have you guys heard about this Shakespeare guy? He seems pretty cool," you would still be within the context of a library which has limited funds to acquire books and thus will naturally acquire books that someone at some point decided were of value to others. If you're in a bookstore, someone thought it would sell or otherwise had the money to make sure it's printed.

You are not absent from the literary tradition that said, first, that women were not intelligent enough to write, and, later, that, okay, maybe they can write (even though they should not have been educated enough to put together that many words and sentences), but it's just not aesthetically pleasing and that has nothing to do with their genitalia. Or, else you say that the genre that is predominantly female is of little literary value despite being culturally dangerous. You don't need to pick one, you can pick a few because it's a grab-bag.

Jane Eyre actually gets a shout-out on the cover of Joanna Russ' How to Suppress Women's Writing. Here's a gem from Wikipedia regarding the androgynous penname Jane Eyre was originally published under:

Speculation about the identity and gender of the mysterious Currer Bell heightened with the publication of Wuthering Heights by Ellis Bell (Emily) and Agnes Grey by Acton Bell (Anne).[12] Accompanying the speculation was a change in the critical reaction to Charlotte's work, as accusations were made that the writing was "coarse",[13] a judgement more readily made once it was suspected that Currer Bell was a woman.[14]

Do you know what happens when a Victorian publisher thinks your writing is too coarse and/or unlikely to get carried by Mudie's? You don't get published, even if you wrote what would be acknowledge as the best novel in English history. Or maybe you publish under a name like George Eliot so that people won't be looking to define your work based on your genitals.

This is probably the most autistic thread on 4Chan right now.

it's a sign that you're a shitty writer

>>8228926
>writing a essay
Yup, its just you.

>>8228926
Your problem is that you did not outline your paper. Here's my method:

>The required number of pages is your basic template
>Make a list of subtopics related to the main subject of discussion
>Allocate an equal amount of space for each subtopic within those pages

This is not a hard rule. Obviously, you will have more to say on some points but breaking up the space makes the whole process easier.

>Flesh out any ideas that come to mind
>Fill the rest of the space with fluff or quotations

The mistake that a lot of kiddies make is to treat an essay as a linear progression. Once you have drawn the skeleton, you can start anywhere!

>>8228917
it removes hilarious ambiguity

Those at the ceremony were the commodore, the fleet captain, the donor of the cup, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Jones

inb4 who gives a fuck about

>>8228880
People here like to pretend only "patrician" books matter but nobody reads that shit, so shitposting about books we haven't read is all that is left to do.

Are you serious? Coming to a forum to post about books you have never read must be the stupidest thing i have ever heard of. Do you really do this?

And yet you post nothing about books. Would ya look at that!