How many words did you write today. I just wrote 3000. (It's only 10am and I'll probably write more.)
>>9848673
I facerolled for five straight hours and have over 9000 hbu
none yet will update later
I wrote 125. But I write poetry, and the current project is using terza rima. I happy with that and if I keep it up I can finish this piece in a week, give or take a day or two.
Just read this recently. I can't remember the last time I read a character study that was this hilarious. Having a close friend who resembles Ignatius certainly made it funnier, not to mention certain traits that paralleled my own personality. Anyone else found this as relatable?
No, absolutely not. In fact I found it quite insulting to both my intellect and my soul. As a sufferer of the serious medical condition of GERD, and being of rather rotund accoutrement myself, I have to say that the grotesque insensitivity of this work is far and away the most vile act of "literature" I have ever had the displeasure of witnessing. Considering that anyone would put forth such effort to mock the plight of a genius mind mired in the mediocrity of simpletons, but also to play this most sympathetic individual's physical ailments for laughs, I can only say that the author's suicide was not unfortunate. Shame on you for perpetuating the ill fame of this literary travesty.
lol not bad
>>9848691
google accoutrement ya dingus
whats the best non fiction book youve ever read?
>>9848490
That one.
>>9848490
essays by montaigne
>>9848502
second.
Its much better than I expected,especially surprised this is the author's first work in english.
Compiled interpretive history is candy to me so I do have a bias.
>regularly invade all of your neighbors for centuries
>everyone else is the problem
>>9849361
sounds like you are talking about the US lmao
is 2016 recent?
How long did it take you guys to read Les Miserables?
>>9848375
took me a month and a half, attempting 50 pages a day (when i was reading it that is) but ended up mainly doing 25-30 pages a day.
I snorted some bath salts soaked in adrenaline and banged it out in about 25 mins.
>>9848375
4 Months, the digressions really slowed me down
Buy our admin's book.
>>9848293
No, admin, buy banner.
does it really take 300 characters to say invincible thinking?
>>9848293
Maybe when the translation comes out.
Is this a fucking joke?
http://nordic.businessinsider.com/stanford-summer-reading-list-2017-6/
- Homegoing,' by Yaa Gyasi
- The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History,' by Elizabeth Kolbert
- 'Salvage the Bones,' by Jesmyn Ward
These are the first books you should read as a stanford undergrad! Iam so glad i never studied there. what a waste of time and money
https://undergrad.stanford.edu/advising/approaching-stanford/three-books
Can't believe a professor of the hard sciences would be pick such trash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIGeDAZ6-q4
>forehead
>bergson
who are some other people that deserve a memeing?
>>9848124
>bergson
I read his on laughter once and jesus christ that was retarded
Junger
So I've deliberated on this for several days now because of how permeated this discussion is among boards. This is my conclusion. To complete an objective (create a product of some kind of art) is to travel towards a destination. In terms of physical capacities, talent (in this case genetics) has the upper hand. It is possible to make up for your shortcomings in sports through absolute mastery of everything you lack in but no matter how much you exercise and develop, there are somethings you cannot achieve. For example, only select men will be capable of benching 400 pounds, it's a physical disposition that can't be attained. For many men, that feat is impossible. Now in the realm of art, there is no objective standard. The objective is subjective. It is possible for every man to think and understand the same thoughts. What differs between however is how long it would take them to get to that position. All information can be distilled so a person can eventually understand. Some may need countless reminders however. Talent in this case is perhaps thinking capacity, which on its own is useless in art, exposed to life experience, and the most crucial ingredient, passion (high stimulated interest). It is not IMPOSSIBLE for an untalented man to work hard and create outstanding, compelling art, but it may be most likely a longer travel than for the man of talent.
A good example is Muggsy Bogues. Therotically, he should not be in the NBA. Howeever, he worked his ass off to perfect his execution in things he could control which made up for his physical insufficiency. BUT no matter how hard Bogues works at weight lifting he will never bench 400 pounds, that's reality of genetics. Genetics doesn't limit your capacity to understand thought, it may however affect your ability to STAY IN thought. Thus making your journey to create MUCH further.
>>9848097
>Genetics doesn't limit your capacity to understand thought
Bait
Stack Thread
Post and rate, judge, comment, do whatever.
>>9847862
>babby's first big boy books
also
>/stack/ thread
delete it and read instead, autismal faggot
>>9847868
I just finished Seneca and am halfway through C&P.
>>9847871
Take off Seneca dustjacket please, I want to see
I've got a copy of the Kojiki which I plan on reading, and would also like to read the Nihongi.
Is the Aston translation the best version available? There's a several volume edition on Amazon, just want to check I'm not missing a better one.
>>9847842
I've been highly interested in japanese history myself, which books do you recommend for a total beginner in the subject?
>>9847861
Not OP, but "A history of Japan" for a general overview and "The Making of Modern Japan" for Tokugawa and modern times are breddy gud
They both have "Further reading" sections if you wanna read more about a specific thing
>>9847886
Thank you! I will check these out.
Leave this board and never return if any one of these apply to you:
>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you don't have at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight
>>9847832
>>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight
Fuck you got me. I'll pack my things
LEAVE THIS BOARD AND NEVER RETURN IF YOU ARE AN UNIRONIC AUTIST WHO COPY PASTES RETARDED SPAM THREADS EVERY FUCKING DAY
>>9847832
>>you read for entertainment
u leave, literatures only purpose is aesthetic.
>pictures paint a thousand words
>somehow books are still "more intellectual" that graphic novels
>>9847784
Pictures paint a thousand
But you can't express mire with a thousand words than with a picture
>>9847797
But you can express more with a thousand words than with a picture*
Sorry, phone.
They say the best way to learn a language is to simply get a book on the selected language and read. What are good, simply written novels to read if you want to learn French and German? I guess Camus for French and maybe Bernhard for German?
Can't learn a new language without a brain OP.
>>9847678
You tried?
>Camus
You can go a bit easier than that. If you want something really basic try Le Petit Nicolas or Le Petit Prince (why do the french love little boys). The biggest obstacle is always grammar, vocabulary can be acquired by being exposed to it numerous times, but if you can't understand the sentence structure you're lost.
Can someone learn to write professionally, or is skill inherent?
>>9847648
Yes. No.
>>9847648
Yes. No but certain personality qualities are better suited for the task of writing for hours on end.
can Stephen King write professionally?
has Stephen King produced anything of literary value?