Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 4420. page

be more specific

>>7671844
Eating Animals by Jonathan Safran Foer

>>7671844
animal liberation by cuck Singer

>>7671655
He is probably the worst sf author I've ever read and trash is where I'd start with him.

>>7671655
I have no idea who he is but why is he wearing chris-chan's shirt?

>>7671799
I heard he won a bunch of awards and was well respected. Who would you recommend for modern SF?

>>7671611
don't let worthless roastwhores get you down, then you're an inferior male.

women are indistinguishable objects made solely to deposit your cum into. They're barely human. They don't think as profoundly and deeply about the world and our existential, ethical, and spiritual situation as men like me and you. They're simply inferior.

They aren't as ontologically inscribed into the world as us. What you need to realize is that what you're "loving" is basically a child or a dog. Their minds are feeble, and they don't truly understand ethics, love, and loyalty.

For this reason you should turn away from women and instead devote your time to watching anime and playing video games.

>>7671623
Dworkinposter 2: This Time I'm Menstruating

The book of Job

Books like Gravity's Rainbow and ATD are chock full of references. I mean, you need to so much to understand them. Not so much Pynchon's other books, especially his lite books.

I find them annoying.

They just strike me as a quirky, gimmicky, inside-joke sort of thing. I like when they come out in spite of themselves. That's all.

>>7671560
References in literature are like references in comedy: utter shit by themselves. Novice (and not so new) writers usually drop pointless references here and there, thinking the reader will be either amazed by their knowledge or confused because he didn't "get it".
In the proper context can be made to work, just like Ulysses is build on upon the greek myth and establishing a parallelism in order to show what should be obvious to everyone but we're not aware (like a sort of episteme, in which we can easily criticize modernity premises but not being aware of the premises of our own historical epoch, yet the alienation can be shown using history as a tool and showing the parallelism or decadence on the overall scheme of a certain element, like Foucault does often too).
This said, a reference is hardly justified, and it needs to be both not-necessary (like first Ulysses commentaries that suggested not editing the book with the chapter titles because ( trying paraphrasing something I read years ago in my mother tongue) "the scaffolding and any structural tool needs to be dismantled to show the final product as a whole, like a finished building") and to be linked with the second-reading of the book (a political or philosophical commentary for example) in a way that makes the point more clear to the reader.
The alternative is name-dropping, something that many authors do today. Open a Dan Brown book and you'll find many details (often wrong) about the construction of cathedrals that serve no purpose whatsoever for the story.

And Pynchon. Like if the references to Metal Gear Solid in Bleeding Edge were fucking necessary.

>>7671147

Jerry Seinfeld - Seinlanguage

>hating the bourgeoisie
>by being a famous comedian/writer
Ok

>>7671147

Become a millionaire

Created first daveposting thread

File: 1451517257388.jpg (232KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1600x900px

I want to into Dave's ear incomprehensible words and noises

>Feeling inadequate after having become immune

You don't, you keep writing like that to provoke those who read your works and come to criticise by saying: blablabla pseudo-intellectual blabla you think you know it all blabla rhetorics blablabla who the hell you think you are blaaaablaaa pretentious and clichè blabla.

Laugh at their own stupidity.

The prose reflects the author. YOU need to stop being so pretentious and smug.

If they can detect it you are still pretentious.
You can do it to such a point that it just blends.
That is true mastery.

>>7670887
why is he shooting the ground?

>>7670893
to show the chinks it's his soil

>>7670887
The song is called "Fortunate Son," not "It Ain't Me."

File: 1441058696602.png (82KB, 624x434px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 624x434px

>>7670885
The "illusion" of free will is subjectively indistinguishable from the reality of free will, so it's a false distinction. Checkmate, determinists.

>>7670885
>obviously in a completely material world it doesn't make sense but even in a spiritual world view I fail to see how it would work
The word "spiritual" has too much religious baggage to be used in this context. Try dualist or idealist instead.

>Surely to have a will you need to have a personality, identity or set of values in order for the decision not to be random
Not really. There just needs to be consciousness.

>the means by which you excercise your free will is set before you come to making any decision
I don't see how that follows.

>>7671089
>Not really. There just needs to be consciousness.

No, there has to be a will, that is different to a conciousness, a conciousness can be entirely responsive.

>I don't see how that follows.
If you have an personality or set of values then those, being set before the decision is made, make the decision. I think a will must be made up of preferences so it even if decision making exists outside of the material world it is still determined by those prefences.

>>7671053
if two things are subjectively indistinguishable it doesn't mean they are the same. For humanity UV and IR light are subjectively indistinguishable, that doesn't make them one of the same.

>>7670640
The senior English options are particularly reprehensible

are you sending your children soonish? because they change their books quite often

>>7670653
naw they are just in kindergarten, but the I cant imagine the level of literature will rise in 10 years.

don't usually like the american southern gothic literature but love Cormac mcCarthy

don't usually like sci-fi but love Philip K Dick and the Strugatsky Bros.

I don't read ethnically diverse authors unless if they're nationalistic like Yukio Mishima

>>7670597
I hate dystopian lit but Brave New World was awesome
I have nothing for sci-fi but "Dune" was amazing
I never saw the appeal for realism but "La Peau de chagrin" was pretty dope

File: image.jpg (194KB, 856x757px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 856x757px

i detest comic books. but Neil Gaiman's Sandman was great

File: 3ro5q1s.jpg (2MB, 2434x2581px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2434x2581px

>>7670586
What do you mean? I just tried clicking on several of them and they all worked.

By collage you mean the collected recommendation images, like these?

>>7670593
No, the ones with the book downloads http://pastebin.com/Mg6JwscV

>>7670595
That's not a collage, that's a link to a download.

They're dead because I stopped wanting to update the pastebin, traded it off to someone who I think didn't feel like keeping it updated either. Anyone else is free to make another paste to link there and re-upload the stuff; I'm just not on here much anymore.

Which ones do you want?

>>7670318
I would read or watch something annoying that would make me emotional so I wouldnt even care to die or some philosophical gymnastics that are not even possible to work out. Just annoy yourself to the point that you dont want to care about living anymore and you will be on the right path. The good news is you dont have to do anything, just take a walk and socialize with people for some time. They will annoy you sooner or later. If I was immortal and I would probably be insane overly manic and happy jumping in front of everyones face because I would be bored and mad of all the shit that is going on and all the pain suffered of losing everything and everyone I cared about vanishing, the eternal pointlessness or I would be shut in somewhere withering away dark souls style.

I wouldnt probably read a book or maybe some stoicism if I felt like it. I would probably go full on Diogenes.

I would read the radical leftist ramblings on my facebook wall.

>>7670343
thank you for complex response
I never been onto stoicism, that thoughtless attitude of a cow standing in the rain.
I'm goinf to read 'tibetan book of the living and dying' because I want to consider and to sort out my thoughts on this topic and from what I want buddism is about nothing more but death and pain.

Does DIogenes wasn't cynic?

>>7670152
>Do you prefer complete compilations or having a separate copy for each play?
I don't care

File: 51uJqm9IyFL._AC_UL320_SR238,320_.jpg (26KB, 238x320px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 238x320px

Don't know about best editions but complete edition vs. individual comes down to what you're doing with it. It's a pain in the ass to carry a complete Shakespeare everywhere and if you're big on annotation it can get annoying trying to write on non-facing pages in the beginning or facing pages near the end.

This was my Shakespeare for a long time. Don't know anything about the quality of the contents but it had pretty engravings in it. Weighed 7 lbs and was impossible to fit in any bag though.

>>7670152
I preferencia Arden over other edition, but The Oxford Shakespeare is cheaper and smaller, and the scholarly work is top notch too.

I preferencia individual works over complete works, mainly because the former are more focused and thorough, though they are more expensive in the long run.

This is what I have at hand
I also have the King Lear edition, but it's back home.

>>/reddit/

Not horrible as far as genre fiction goes, but not good - certainly not like how some people seem to pedestal him. I've never been able to stomach him, but I might just be having a kneejerk reaction because Reddit and Goodreads seem to fucking love him.

>>7669998
His books are entertaining. Not life changing classics, but I don't think anyone except reddit claims them to be. They're enjoyable to read, I enjoyed the way of kings.

>>7669998
Incredibly entertaining books. Not that high quality and the prose is functional at best. I'd love to see what he could do if he took like 5 years for a single book, but oh well. No other author right now can really match his output. And considering the sheer amount of words this guy produces the enjoyment I get from them is outstanding.

He's like Stephen King during his most productive period and producing stuff that's actually good. Not great, certainly flawed in several ways, but solidly good across the board.

I utterly love the Youtube videos of his writing lectures though. A lot of really good and interesting stuff in those.