James Joyce, more like Fuck Ireland
>>7329214
Y E A T S
E
A
T
S
D U B L I N E R S
U........................R
B........................E
L.........................N
I..........................I
N........................L
E........................B
R........................U
S R E N I L B U D
So I started a post on tumblr about how homosexuality ruins the dynamic of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson. They, to me, are platonic best friends. Brothers, even. Brothers don't kiss or cuddle or want to talk about their favourite lube.
On tumblr, I seem to be the only person that believes this. Just me. Only me. One guy.
And then I found out that there's over 500 people that support the idea of "JohnLock", and suddenly I'm trying to erase queer history and I'm the biggest homophobic bastard since your anon's Grandfather by criticizing a Sherlock/John homosexual interpretation.
Can I have some help? Can we discuss homosexuality in Sherlock lore, and how the OP believes it detracts from the narrative instead of serves it?
Why do you feel the need to discuss this, really? Can't you just disregard obnoxious faggots?
post your url
Watson got married to a woman (not that that proves anything.)
certain things they did were normal for platonic male friends of the day but would seem gay as hell now. Times were different then. only 2 decades earlier Abe Lincoln slept in the same bed as a man every night for like 5 years. this was considered normal at the time and only the rich had a bed to themselves.
Why aren't you a vegetarian, /lit/?
because i dont give a fuck hahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah \m/
>>7328956
Because egg & dairy animals have existences that are 10000x more torturous and inhumane than feeder animals who are just fattened then slaughtered.
It would actually be more ethical to only eat meat and avoid eggs and milk.
Because I don't think animals deserve my moral judgement as much as humans do.
That said, I don't think animals deserve to be tortured, but being humanely put down for food? Don't see the issue.
Anyone still reading? I've fallen a bit behind, but I'm hoping to do some catching up this weekend.
HELPFUL LINKS
http://www.ottosell.de/pynchon/rainbow.htm
gravitys-rainbow.pynchonwiki.com/wiki/
OLD THREADS
>>7210349
>>7181040
>>7306721
Week-end catch up incoming...
Favourite scenes so far? First time readers?
Did the whole time Slothrop was at the Casino remind anyone else of Mondaugen's story from V?
On a broader level, Slothrop seems to be the archetypal Pynchon character of the book, on the same lines as Stencil, Oedipa, Doc Sportello. For no real reason I've assumed this is Pynchon the character/his version of himself, so that's how I always imagine the characters in my mind.
ulysses reading group when
do we have any good prose from Italia?
d'Annunzio's god-tier
Calvino's comfy, especially if you get his fuck off book of fairytales
what is good prose supposed to mean
>>7328878
at least easily readable and enjoyable
What do you think about it?
>>7328728
I tried reading the first pages. Awfully written. It's some kind of bad-taste-o-meter if you find girls with that book on the street.
Wasn't that bad during the first few chapters until they actually hook up and then it's just annoying. I just HAD to end it/be over with it because I always need to finish what I start.
Patrician teir
Hard To Understand Ranking
Hardest:
Hegel, Heidegger, Lacan, Baudrillard, Derrida, Kant
Harder:
Jameson, Deleuze, Lyotard, Badiou
Hard:
Foucault, Butler, Pynchon, Marx, Zizek
Who would you add? How would you change it?
pointless namedropping.
I tried to read Derrida once, and Hegel is not even close to him in terms of difficulty.
Deguy should be in there
POST /LIT/ CHARTS
He puts the sticky in the thread and shitposts all over it.
Let's say I have a Joycean-level masterpiece in a .txt file on my laptop. What steps would I have to take to get it published.
>>7328670
rewrite it in an .xlsx
>>7328670
lets say you did. you don't though
>>7329095
wtf did you just about me you piece of shit
What does /lit/ think of this book?
>>7328632
good intro to philosophy as it pertains to "real life" and not just armchair intellectual masturbation.
Never read because motorcycle fetishism seems like baby boomer bullshit.
>>7328809
So a shitty Nietzsche then?
Can we talk about Purity by Franzen?
You lied to me, /lit/. This book is actually pretty good. I just finished it and I'm still in that post-novel stupor that only excellent books can put me in.
Sure, Franzen's works can be described as a thousand miles wide and two feet deep, and sure his writing is accessible almost to a fault. And his butchering of internet vernacular made me cringe a couple times.
But Franzen knows characters, and he knows how to spin a complex yarn while making it seem effortless and natural. Andreas Wolf and Annabel are perhaps the most well-developed and interesting characters I've come across in quite some time. His attacks on feminism, the Reddit/tumblr circlejerk and experimental art bullshit were all spot-on. This is probably the first book I've read that I feel like really begins to address the experience of the next-generation of Americans.
I don't know, I just thought it was a really great read all around. Much better than Freedom. Just as good as the Corrections.
Pic very related: first hit on Google
I almost want to like Franzen just to spite the SJW cunts, but I couldn't even bring myself to finish The Corrections, it was just inane.
>>7328647
This is one of those cases where the enemy of my enemy is still not my friend.
If the official reason to hate Franzen is because of the typical SJW bullshit then no, I don't throw my fedora in the pile. I will abstain from judgement.
I only will say he is bad on the grounds that he is a bad writer.
Franzen has the biggest balls of any famous living "literary" author. /lit/ might sneer at most modern-day authors because they didn't have the foresight to publish 100 years ago, but Franzen deserves a serious read to see where "literary" is going.
what kind of notes do you take while reading through a novel?
>>7328612
small journal that I keep nearby to jot notes in and pg numbers
sometimes larger entries in the journal if i think of something particularly large/difficult to explain and it interrupts my reading which kinda sucks, but its sort of a lose/lose situation
Character names, brief description, and map of how the characters relate to one another.
>>7328633
>>7328637
downs syndrome, illiteracy
just underline key passages and make one word notes in the margins. character maps and other such bullshit are maybe useful for children's lit like lotr and harry potter, but if you need to lean on them to keep up with real literature you're in the wrong ballpark.
what the fuck am i reading?
am i doomed to be a pleb?
>>7328568
Lol read the plot summary on Wiki then tell people you read it. It works everytime and people think you're genius
>>7328568
Don't read this until you are ready. It will break you if you read it at the wrong time.
But if you ever reach the point where you can read it (you'll know the feeling when it happens), it will change your life
It's a novel about form and language, trying to autistically understand the plot is besides the point.
How valuable is a english degree for someone who wants to be a writer?
>not becoming a great writer first and receiving an honorary phd
>>7328589
>not being the first ever "legitimately illiterate" NY Times bestseller
>spending ten to fifteen years learning to regurgitate one of a million different lexicons of jargon to three people who will ever listen, so that you can spend the rest of your life writing papers in that jargon or you will be fired and have to suck penises for money
>conducive to being a good writer
ALL academics are great writers, the constant grind to publish absolute horseshit in an ivory tower built of smaller ivory towers or die of AIDS really fills your soul with ideas for novels that speak to and from the zeitgeist
>title of book is a quote from Homer or Shakespeare
>It's a greentext thread on the "intellectual"/"art" (/his/, /lit/, /sci/, /biz/, /pol/, /v/, /g/) boards
>title of book is a quote from Shakespeare
I bet you're the type of /r/books-browsing pseud who thinks 'pretentious' stands alone as a valid criticism of a book, and that 'Shakespeare is overrated'
>quoting from Homer
Nobody does this, though.