>What is the body without organs of a book? There are several, depending on the nature of the lines considered, their particular grade or density, and the possibility of their converging on a "plane of consistency" assuring their selection. Here, as elsewhere, the units of measure are what is essential: quantify writing. There is no difference between what a book talks about and how it is made. Therefore a book also has no object. As an assemblage, a book has only itself, in connection with other assemblages and in relation to other bodies without organs.
>We will never ask what a book means, as signified or signifier; we will not look for anything to understand in it. We will ask what it functions with, in connection with what other things it does or does not transmit intensities, in which other multiplicities its own are inserted and metamorphosed, and with what bodies without organs it makes its own converge. A book exists only through the outside and on the outside.
>A book itself is a little machine; what is the relation (also measurable) of this literary machine to a war machine, love machine, revolutionary machine, etc.—and an abstract machine that sweeps them along? We have been criticized for overquoting literary authors. But when one writes, the only question is which other machine the literary machine can be plugged into, must be plugged into in order to work. Kleist and a mad war machine, Kafka and a most extraordinary bureaucratic machine . . .
Thoughts?
Sounds like they can't do conceptual readings of books without bringing in cultural critiques, as if books are only reactions.
>>8228381
Why would they?
>>8229628
Well, the point of scholarship is not simply to put words on paper but to be correct.
Has anyone here ever heard of Toiletpaper magazine? Somebody mentioned it to me in passing today, and I can't find very much about it online. Looks cool but I want to hear a review before I go around buying wordless books.
Not sure if /lit/ is quite the right place for this, but I wasn't sure where else to go. Kick me out if this doesn't fit.
http://www.toiletpapermagazine.org/
>>8228244
for a moment I thought that was from a gloryhole movie
go market your shit someplace else
>>8228244
>this fucking website
this mobile based shit is killing me...
Why do the endings to books always suck?
Pic related
>>8228132
>reading for plot
>>8228139
Endings though. I used to read the last page of the book before reading the whole thing.
I might start doing that again.
>>8228132
>always
did you read all of them
>neuromancer
Gibson couldn't write for shit. the plot has no momentum and the descriptions are suicide-worthy. He did have amazing ideas though, but that doesn't mean it's a good book.
>Plato had defined the human being as an animal, biped and featherless, and was applauded. Diogenes plucked a fowl and brought it into the lecture-room with the words, ‘Here is Plato’s human being.’ In consequence of which there was added to the definition, ‘having broad nails’
The best mind in philosophy
Then Plato added, "but with nails."
Neither had the answers. Diogenes was an entertaining contrarian and Plato was a loud-but-quiet guy with too-fiery-emotions.
I'm sure neither of them ever said that, though. It was probably just two random guys.
>>8227920
>Diogenes was an entertaining contrarian
yea that's my point
Diogenes is what happens when you take Socratic thought to its logical conclusion. But, more importantly, he is credited with planting the seeds for Stoicism . To me his nost admirable trait was his idea of living with minimal possessions and being the most free ,healthy, and most philosophically noble as a result of that life
Is this jackass even able to write a novel not including an edgy self-insert protagonist? This was fucking abysmal. My Twisted World might be a better social satire than this
How is Francois a self insert? For this novel hollaback had to research what it's like being a professor because we was never in academia.
>>8227874
>weinb4 /pol/ memes
>>8227859
Nah he makes you think it's himself or yourself so that you can vaguely project into it, but at some point towards the end there's a shift and i doubt anyone could think the same way as his character does.
post books where the protag: A) actively narrates the story through their point of view B) is deranged/inebriated/unreliable in some way C) contains an actually worthwhile plot
Book of the New Sun
>>8227716
lolita
janine 1982
Where can I find the General zapped and angel??
kissanime
>>8227423
libgen has it in epub
>>8227777
nice digits
>Kurt Mondaugen
Fucking why
The young Pynchon loved to show off his rudimentary understanding of German.
I had a character named Friedrich Rockweg. Not clever enough so I went with this instead.
"Moon eyes"? What about it?
Share your most contrarian literary opinions
there has been no "great writer" yet. literature is just now approaching its golden age.
>>8227277
Nice pepe, my dude
Tao Lin inspires his readers to live kinder and more deliberate lives.
Does /lit/ keep the jackets of their books? Why or why not?
>>8227217
Not when I'm reading them. After I'm done with a book I put the jackets back on.
I use them as a book mark
The first thing I do is take them off
Can you basically boil down nietzsche's philosophy to the preposition that life would be extremely painful for you unless you make yourself a big guy?
>>8227013
Yea and I appreciate the memery but good luck getting it to catch on outside of this thread, is all I can say, to you. My man.
>>8227013
Shut up
>>8227013
actually yes
>when you realise all the pretentious displays of respect for religion and anything are acts of egoism and all the bullshit everyone speaks can be easily dismissed and it tears lit and all the other pseuds apart
>>8226885
>when op is the king of the pseuds
>>8226885
>when I realize you are a dumb politician poster and probably don't have a single aesthetic image of a sunset saved
>>8226898
>saving images of a sunset
>not experiencing the beautiful futility of life yourself on the moment
Seems like my entire generation somewhat revolved around this series.
I have seen the movies but I don't know if reading the books is worth it.
I've heard people say that JK Rowling isn't a very good writer. A lot of criticism on how she does dialogue:
"..." said Snape angrily
"..." said Ron Bravely.
So can you honestly recommend this series? Is it actually a fun and engaging read or are people just overreacting because it was their first somewhat deep experience with a book?
They're bad. Not worth reading for anyone at any age.
Why is dialogue such a chore to write well? Every time you include an indication of who is speaking, it makes the writing look uglier, unless you use all kinds of tricks to paint over it.
>>8226844
They have good characters and the books were very planned out with meticulous foreshadowing. If you are a fan of the movies, there are a lot of scenes the books have that the movies don't. Including some foreshadowed things that were left out of early movies because they seemed unimportant at the time, even though they later became major plot points.
Her prose is nothing special but it's nothing terrible either, she is a better writer than most modern YA authors.
It depends on what books you like, if you read mostly light fiction there is no reason for you not to have read it by now.
is it true that /lit/ hates down Dan Brown novels?
why?
>>8226759
because this is a literature board and this is not literature.
>>8226766
why not?
I enjoyed him in middle school and appreciate his role in my development as a reader, but I don't plan to revisit his works anytime soon.
I want to learn more about Vedanta.
Which books do you recommend?
The Vedantas (aka the Upanishads)
I mean, shit, its in the name dude
>>8226846
Would I really get something out of those without being knowledgeable about the context?
A Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta by René Guénon.
Then
The Vedanta and Western Tradition by Ananda Coomaraswamy