I'm about halfway through this and although I enjoy it quite a bit (it reminds me of acid trips) the 30+ page descriptions of gay sex got a little old after ten pages
>>7705829
Its all pretty neat if you're gay and like acid, though
>>7705829
Welcome to burroughs.
The gayest acid trip you'll go on.
It makes me want to shoot my wife.
>Oedipa settled back, to await the crying of lot 49.
Jesus fucking Christ, really?
Bravo Pinecone.
>>7705768
No, we're not doing one of these stupid threads. Take it to /tv/
>>7705768
>And but so, she really was the broom of the system.
Fuck you, bandanna man.
>So my friend was all like Yeah I had to park under a palm tree and there was a gull's nest right above it and I haven't had a chance to get a car wash yet, and but then I get inside the car and it's even worse on the inside and I'm all Dude this is The Seagull and Other Stories here
yeah just no, Chekhov
hey /lit/, i'm recovering from a mild dissociative disorder in which essentially my mind is consistently blank and imagining things, especially visually, takes a fair bit of effort, images never just pop into mind.
My ability to visualise things in detail is pretty terrible along with short term memory so reading has been recommended to me to build this ability up.
The issue is that when reading a novel, the image doesn't come spontaneously and I I'm often caught in two minds about how to make myself visualise what i'm reading, I know there is no right way but would like some ideas from strong readers as to what they think is best.
Do you imagine scenes like from a movie in your head, do you pretend to be the character who's speaking first person, do you switch between perspectives or 'shots'? And does it all just come automatically to you?
pic related is what i'm (struggling to) read now
>>7705755
>Do you imagine scenes like from a movie in your head, do you pretend to be the character who's speaking first person, do you switch between perspectives or 'shots'? And does it all just come automatically to you?
Yes , but as far as i know ,not everyone can. A lot of people read without the need of "visualizing" what is reading ,so you shouldn't worry too much about that, just read.
>>7705755
It's a combination of imagery and emotion/feeling. I tend to feel what the author is writing as much as seeing it.
For me it's also not like a movie or anything but snippets of images in between sentences.
When you are reading do you give the characters a "face" of you just imagine them as a "concept"?
Is anyone into Onetti
I've read one of his short stories, so far. It was very disturbing. I bought one of his books, also, bur haven't read it yet, it's sitting on my shelf. What do you think of him, OP?
What do you folks think of Belgian literature, in particular this short story by Jean Mogin (1921-198)?
'The Giants were Grinning'
At the Rijksmuseum Joseph took a detour to show me a picture of two giants vomiting.
The leftmost and homosexual giant was vomiting blood and semen, the rightmost giant was vomiting distorted forms, revealed from the correctly anamorphic angle to be a tangle of bodies arranged so as to ensure mutual death. Of those bodies, only painted were the imperfections and sagging contours; the forms of the faces were plucked from their warts. Both giants were infected with a disease that caused necrophilia.
The forms were painted to suggest they were a fungal infection on the canvass, save for those in the background, layered in thick mottled dollops that seemed to reach for language to embody them in the adjective ‘tumorous’. These forms seemed to be thickening to language, swelling to the riotous form of lolling tongues, seeking out description at some horizonal chaos where all engages all.
Vomiting as they were, it was discernible that the giants were grinning.
While not obviously skillful, the artist had compacted astonishing detail in the picture. Tattooed on the left giant’s naked stomach was cross-section of its digestion with diagrams chronicling the process not in stages, but in ages, the excretory ‘age’ as some era of apotheosis. Tattooed on the right giant’s chest was a landscape of images designed to provoke description; they already seemed to exist half in painting and half in language, and so it is redundant to describe them. Both of the giants were balding – their hairlines were receding to reveal tattoos of scalp rotting on skull. Some of the paint was peeling and showed the artist’s preparatory pencil sketches – renderings of the giants’ skeletons, structures that looked architectural rather than anatomical. I spent a good deal of time staring at the tumorously-clotted background, a landscape in which intestinal, vascular, seminal and necrotic themes were congealed in visual analogy.
The painting drew me in, but also seemed to push out; to want to infect and permeate, to be translated and transcribed, to mix with language in mutual saturation, to reproduce itself in a conquering variety of forms.
This picture was awful, in the old sense of awe-full, but in the new sense as well. It disturbed me. I asked Joseph why he showed it to me and he laughed. We were tense in the museum café. I still visit him when I’m in the country but our friendship has suffered.
Big names of Belgian literature: Simenon, Maeterlinck, Michaux, Yourcenar.
Belgian literature has a strong symbolist bent to it I find. There is a straight line from Maeterlinck to Michaux.
>Belgian literature
Your Eulenspiegel novel in French is very popular in Russia
>the story
thoughts:
first paragraph: if he was born at least 30 years earlier it would blend finely with all of the fin du siecle decadance and expressionism
second paragraph: ok, he has an idea for a piece of modern art but is too lazy to make it. i've seen it before in Barthelme, Pelevin, Delillo; all of those vanguard pomo writers keep doing that shit. such conceptualism! I just do know enough of the hipsters flocking to Kassel, Barcelona and New York to have zero reverence over someone saying "gallery".
fourth paragraph: oh, someone wants to be a magical realist.
the rest of it: dude, please finish the story and post it again.
Jean Mogin is real (check his wiki) but this does seem a bit off. It doesn't seem early to mid twentieth century European (I've seen this story before on lit, about a year ago, and saved it).
How are Penguin? Theyre really popular but I remember reading here that theyre quality (lots of typos, missing sentence s) is shoddy
Is their MD release good?
Penguin books are cheap because they are shit. Norton Critical Editions or Oxford World Classics whenever possible.
>>7705678
Really, if you stick to the well known classics, they really are fine. /lit/ just hates what is popular. I prefer Oxford, Cambridge (if possible) and Everyman, but if Penguin is the cheapest? I don't mind.
And for Moby Dick, it's difficult to mess that up. It was written in English. Criticism is usually levelled against it for the translations used and typos in them.
>>7705696
Oxford World Classics are pretty much exactly the same price in most cases though.
Just bought Ulysses yesterday, reading Dubliners now. Should I read the Odyssey before Ulysses or just dive in? What are good translations of the Odyssey?
If you're even asking this question it means you're not ready for Ulysses.
>>7705664
just read it if you're interested in it. You can revisit it later after having read the Odyssey if you feel like it. It's not the fucking bible it's just a book
>>7705704
What a pretentious and completely fucking useless way to respond to this question
>>7705664
As far as I can tell, a good understanding of the Odyssey can definitely improve the experience of reading Ulysses, but there's nothing to suggest that it's explicitly necessary. If your interest lies with Ulysses more so than with The Odyssey, then I would go ahead and read the former first. seeing as Ulysses is a difficult read regardless of whether or not you've read the Odyssey beforehand. However, if that's what you decide to do I would definitely recommend going back to Ulysses later after having read the Odyssey, it's well worth it to see the allusions and parallels that Joyce built into the book
What does /lit/ think of Kripke?
Pretty good. Probably won't get much positive reception here because of overwhelming continental demographic
Like all analyticals: a combination of pseudo-math and pseudo-philosophy without the scientific rigor of the first or the brilliance of the second.
He's answering very specific problems that pertain to logic, which is cool but boring.
>YFW you discover all of the old archives from the greatest week in the history of /lit/, when Thomas Pynchon was posting here, have been deleted and you've lost your last true connection to this place. The excuse you kept using to come back and that you'd used to falsely convince yourself in some fucked up way that maybe, just maybe, he'll come back. After all, if someplace is good enough for Pynchon, it's good enough for you. But now he's gone. And the archive is gone. And you just don't know why you're here anymore.
Pynchon is a hack and if you like Pynchon you will die a stupid virgin.
>>7705482
>when Thomas Pynchon was posting here
Luckily you also lost the archives there the fake pynchon poster came back for attention and revealed himself to be a super annoying self-absorbed faggot, who kept playfully telling people not to search for his identity and then bumping the thread when they gave up.
>>7705499
I don't believe you.
I'm looking for some good books to learn more about economics -- not just "the basics", but some books of actual depth. I'm interested given how economics-oriented this election cycle is. I'm fine with numbers, I'm working on a mathematics/literature double degree -- so really, just throw me anything no matter its knowledge "prerequisites", since I can figure those out myself and move forwards on my own once I know some good starting places.
I mean, anything other than Marx. I've read him. I want more substance.
no I'm not from /pol/
Modern economists are either cultists or dissident cultists. Mainstream economists are basically autistic scientistic retards who think the entire universe is reducible to their gay little formulas, and non-mainstream economists are Marxists in history departments.
With the natural sciences, for example, you may have some critiques of the epistemology of mainstreamers or their dumbass political and philosophical views, but ultimately you can be pretty sure that Lawrence "Complete Retard" Krauss at least knows how to figure out a star's wobble or something. With economists though, it's not the same. There's no Newtonian-Einsteinian mainstream to basically maintain. It's a few different camps with "luminiferous aether"-tier ideas that they defend with inscrutable mathematical rituals and disdain for everyone who even slightly disagrees, and who delude themselves into thinking they have the same mainstreamness as the Newtonian-Einsteinian thing in science because nothing more mainstream-y has presented itself.
Don't listen to economists. They are actual morons.
>>7705475
well given how interested I am in this year's election cycle, what should I read? I'm in a situation where my gut wants to support Trump after called out Bush for 9/11 and the Iraq war, but I feel retarded for it. I just want to get a better bearing before I say I like Trump out loud.
>>7705500
if this isn't bait you are a retard
>he doesn't read his Shakespeare normalized into prose narrative
>>7705454
he still posts american psycho memes.
hey /lit/, I'm trying to find an english translation of the best recorded version of the labors of Heracles so I an use it as a literary and stylistic reference for something I'm working on
>>7705433
Can anyone point me to the right version to use?
How did Wittgenstein describe language? There's a word that he used "Language is ..." but I forgot it. Also general Wittgenstein discussion.
Shapes do not have religion.
a virus
How would Wittgenstein respond to wew lad?
Post groups of books that are required to be read together
Pic not related
The Odyssey and Ulysses
Infinite Jest and The Fault In Our Stars
>>7705386
Fuck u memer
Was anybody else severely disappointed with this? Like this is goosebumps level stuff here.
>>7705333
I don't expect anything from Stephen King, so no I was not disappointed.
>>7705333
It's Stephen King so I don't know what you were even expecting. He's basically RL Stine for adults.
>>7705333
I really liked it. Its less scary than The Shinnig but it was more cozier for me to read. Its like the older he gets less atetion he puts into the scary element itself and concentrates in other things