Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 4874. page

His novels are second-rate. Look into his poetry.

Mayor of Casterbridge

>>7374038
His poetry is second rate, look into his novels.

Tess is a good place to start OP.

>>7373634
>Nick Cave

what did you hear

>>7373661
to big, slow pace... and fantasy isn't realy my thing

butler

Chapman

Fitzgerald first if you have trouble understanding Chapman

>>7373399
Erland Lagerlöf.

>>7373206

Pretty much-- but your second point is not present anywhere in the book.

I liked this film adaption that was uploaded recently
https://youtu.be/JVss4Fa3uAw

Money really cannot buy "happiness." ("The only benefit of civilization consists in a greater variety of sensory experiences").

Karma is a great deal more complex than "what goes around comes around"-- in fact, that phrase is not only incomplete it's totally inaccurate.

Buddhism is not pantheistic. If Nirvana were simply dissolving back into the all then death would be Nirvana, and death is absolutely not Nirvana.

>>7373227
>but your second point is not present anywhere in the book.
when siddhartha's son takes jis leave of his father, that action mirrors when siddhartha leaves his own father. "what goes around comes around". siddhartha pretty much says this himself, that it's a cruel irony.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1536x2048px

>>7373202
A quiet death in my sleep.

>>7373205
so you want Santa to murder you?

>>7373202
santa...psh no such thing. just a fiary tale designed to make little kids suck up to the economical corporate man. merry christmas? i think not

>>7373018
>Thin hair.
I don't care what ugly people have to say.

>>7373039
spoken like a true anglo

>>7373039
You got your boards wrong
>>>/fa/ is two blocks down

>>7372738
>YES I WAS A MOUNTAIN FLOWER I SAID YES I WAS ULYSSES
Really Joyce?

>>7372906
Ya I liked it

><10 write it out
>>10 use the numerals

>>7372508
and if it is exactly 10, use '11 minus one'

>>7372493
Yes, it looks better. Numbers seem to disturb the text and make it look ugly and administrative.

"John went to the market and bought five apples.

"John went to the market and bought 5 apples."

The latter is text message tier.

*bows respectfully towards you*

>>7371742
ha-so

Ryu Murakami. Coin Locker Babies inspired a moderate amount of Japanese pop fiction and is super-gross and violent and surreal (and has Anemone, the best waifu in fiction), so you won't get bored; and it's still pretty introspective about modern Japan, in a very nihilistic and funny way. From The Fatherland With Love is half-Tom Clancy half-social commentary.

>>7371684
I read daily and enjoy it.

I listen to ice clink in my glass.

i write

read a bunch of it.

write a lot of it until it's not shit

also, have feelings (a lot of people miss this part)

>>7371154
I have a similar question to OP

How can i write poetry and not be completely embarrassed/disgusted by it when looking back on it in the future?

>>7372675
I don't think you can anon
Unless you write some Whitman and Eliot, subtexty ,allusive ,planned and perfectly executed posey you're doomed to look back on it as a cringey mess.

But hey the best artists are their own worst critics. It's probably "disgusting and embarrassing" because it's tangible and good poetry.

>When you self consciously tear up everything you write because you can't help but think you suck at writing and should just stahp.

>>7370906
>I am 12 and why exactly is Hegel supposed to be a major, unavoidable capstone in philosophy?
He's usually treated these days (at least in America and Britain) as avoidable, but large swathes of philosophy since his time has been either developed out of his philosophy (Marx, elements of Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Derrida, the critical theorists, existentialism, certain strains of feminism) or has developed in response to him (most of the rest of Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, analytic philosophy).

He's worth studying either for historical reasons (a solid understanding of the emergence of analytical philosophy is very much helped by understanding his dialectic, which Russell at least had been a big proponent of in his youth), or because of direct relevance to subsequent movements in philosophy that haven't even necessarily moved past him so much as altered elements of his work.

>Please explain the big ideas in language that a teenager could understand.
Absolutely not possible. Philosophy generally is hard, since the entire pretense of it is a movement away from common opinions to (hopefully) knowledge or wisdom, but Hegel's work is especially difficult to simplify since the actual content of it resists such simplification.

>In particular, please expound the history of the "Master/Slave dialectic" idea, that I assume is Hegel's, and compare this both with the "Master/Slave morality" which I assume is Nietzsche's, and furthermore with the probable "Alpha/Kek" oversimplification meme which invokes the above phrase, and is currently popular on 4chan and elsewhere.

The Master-Slave dialectic is laid out in the Phenomenology of Spirit, and is (at least in largest part) an account of consciousness. It seems to be in particular an account of what happens to a consciousness when it encounters another consciousness (two people encountering each other, concretely speaking). Hegel probably developed some of it out of one of his big sources for his understanding of dialectic, Plato's dialogue Parmenides, wherein there's a short passage that uses them as an example to refute a certain understanding of things. But as per above, it'd be too much damn work to 1) summarize it 2) in a simple way 3) that does justice to it. If you must, read a commentary on it, or take a look at it itself; parts will certainly confuse you, but it's pretty short.

Nietzsche's understanding of it seems to be based on his readings of ancient literature; as a trained philologist, he's detailing historical phenomenon. I'm not sure his Master-Slave thesis is related to Hegel's.

>>7371065

Thanks for the post I guess, but the "absolutely not possible" pronouncement is patently absurd.

We might step away from my "teenager" prompt, or point to Hegel's alleged difficulty and opacity, but there are scholars and historians whose job and personal interest it is to know and understand a person's life course and how their thought developed, how their formal training, where their analogies might have come from. There exist wiki articles, "Hegel in 90 minutes", and so on which although might not be accessible to Dustin, do reduce in length. You could of course take exception to any one of these as being of poor quality, but the point is that any long work of any kind is, in principle, amenable to summary - the real question being what quantities and qualities of loss of information are acceptable for such a purpose.

We are on a Balinese Puppet Show, so I put it to you that some degredation is acceptable-we all know to take what is done here with a grain of salt, but advice given can be useful as a pointer.

He's gonna do so-many cases and instances of whatever it is he's talking about, and these will be amenable to some degree of accurate, honest simplification. I get the whole not-wanting-to-pleb-it-up with appeals to common-sense-as-oracle impulse, but at some point this is dishonest.

Obviously the simplest thing for me to do would be to just actually read the guy and track down idea-provenance to help myself, but the absurdity of the (one part of the) reply still stands.

>>7370906
first thing's first: ignore this poser >>7371065

assume we use concepts, let's call them "categories" after kant, to understand the world. if you want to hear the full story read the first critique, but i think this idea is commonplace by now.

building upon this, hegel's idea is now very simple: those concepts, our categories, have a life of their own. in other words, they can be deduced. this is the work of logic, but don't think of frege here. yes, you are moving from one thing to another, but not via mechanical rules. you move from one thing to another because you desire it.

this is why, in reality, logic is really the work of history. every concept has a blind spot, you see, something missing, and this is what produces desire. every concept is itching to move on to the next thing. the trick is to clarify the concepts that we live by and to find their blind spots. then you can predict where they will go, and likewise will be able to predict all of history.

there, now you understand hegel.

Holden was the hero, dingbat.

Now, Holden Caufield.....

Satan in Paradise Lost /thread

>>7370897
>>>r/thread

>>7370598
Haha, I saw that earlier too.

I don't arrange my shelves by emotion, make unwanted references in public and I don't care about Hogwarts. But I would often rather be reading than anything else, spend my excess money on books and become involved enough in what I read that I may be emotionally affected or eschew some sleep.

No, fuck off.

25% talking about books I haven't read
25% not finishing the books I've started
25% talking shit about books I haven't read
25% buying books and never reading them
10% spooks

Who are you quoting

>Plato LOATHED Homer, the Iliad, and the Odyssey

No he didn't, fuck off.

nah, he was the greek muhammad